2020

An analysis of Surrey (City) v. Co-operators General Insurance Company.

An analysis of Jackson v Cooper.

It’s important to understand the specific duties and obligations required for a good customer-broker relationship.

Court of Appeal rejects all sums approach.

Short-term rentals of electric scooters (also known as e-scooters) raise a number of questions. Are e-scooters legally classified as motor vehicles (or even automobiles)? If so, what are the implications of this?

Expert testimony can provide invaluable assistance to a case. By its very nature, it provides the trier of fact with insight that it would not otherwise have and can make your case. However, an expert who crosses the line into advocacy can ultimately do more harm than good. Two recent decisions provide lawyers, insurance adjusters and the public with an idea of how the court will respond to experts who become advocates for one party or the other.

The court’s decision in Petz v Duguay highlights the importance of establishing a plaintiff’s credibility in personal injury matters, as subjective testing and self-reporting underlying an expert’s opinion cannot be relied upon, unless the credibility of the plaintiff is first established.

In 1588444 Ontario Ltd. v State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 2017 ONCA 42, the Ontario Court of Appeal, specifically Justices Laskin, Feldman and Hourigan, were asked to overturn the Order of Justice H.K. O’Connell, dated October 16, 2015, dismissing State Farm’s motion for leave to amend its Statement of Defence.

I wrote this article with the hope of providing a road map for counsel who practise in and outside of the province of Ontario and are looking for a quick summary on how to deal with claims that they consider frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of process.

On Jan. 27, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada decided in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co. that future CPP disability benefits are not deductible from coverage afforded by an SEF 44 Endorsement.