July 27, 2023
By Jordan Petruska In Tsivaras v. The Cadillac Fairview Corporation, 2023 ONSC 3973, the defendant, Cadillac Fairview Corporation (“Cadillac”), brought a motion to dismiss the action for delay under subrule 24.01(1)(c) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, RRO 1990, Reg 194(“the Rules”). The court did not dismiss the action for delay despite there being a […]
July 25, 2023
By Samuel Pevalin, Student-at-Law Overview The Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) considered the issue of what constitutes an “accident” under 3(1) of the Statutory Accidents Benefits Schedule (“SABS”) in Rathbone v. Co-operators General Insurance Company, 2023 CanLII 58468. The applicant, Mr. Rathbone, sustained injuries when he ordered a coffee at a drive-thru and the lid came off, burning […]
July 20, 2023
By Erin Crochetière The court in Gillespie v. Fraser, 2023 ONSC 4183, dismissed a defendant’s motion to set aside default judgment in circumstances where defence counsel was negligent. The facts of the case are unusual. The plaintiff’s mother was murdered by her father and he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. The plaintiff alleges […]
July 12, 2023
By Annie Levanaj In Filippova v. Cross, et al., 2023 ONSC 3777, the plaintiff, a nursing student, filed a lawsuit against her college, a long-term care home she received training from, and its employees after being removed from the nursing program in November 2020. The plaintiff commenced her original action against those defendants on September […]
July 05, 2023
By Antoinette Monardo The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently released its decision in The Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company v. Nelson, 2023 ONSC 386. This decision addresses the issues of jurisdiction and judicial review in the appraisal process. Context In October 2017, the Respondent’s home was destroyed in a fire. The Respondent (the […]
June 14, 2023
By Amanda Colarossi Overview In Dahi v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company, 2023 CanLII 32797, the applicant was involved in an accident on January 29, 2015 and sought payment of accident benefits from the respondent. The issues in dispute were whether the claimant was catastrophically impaired under Criterion 7, the cost of CAT assessments, […]
