Limitation Defence Meets its Match in Section 7 of the LAT Act
Pre-Existing Psychological Conditions No Bar to CAT Designation by Doug Letto
Expert Reports: Disclosure Obligations with Respect to Letters of Instruction and Other Foundational Documents: Edwards v. McCarthy
How Much is Too Much to Charge in Fees on an AB Cashout
The Court’s View of Priority Disputes between Accident Benefit Insurers Providing Basic Mandatory Versus Optional Enhanced Coverages to their Insureds
Reconsideration Decision: What constitutes “compelling evidence” of a pre-existing condition and who holds the burden of proof? by Mallory Allan
CAT Assessment Costs Are Excluded From the Non-CAT Entitlement Limit by Gordon Lee
Ontario Court of Appeal Holds Rescission Ab Initio Not Available for Auto Policies
How Much Attendant Care is Enough Attendant Care? LAT Considerations for CAT Applicants Arijana B. Schrauwen
Appraisal Process Trumps Litigation as a Means of Resolving Insurance Related Property Valuation Issues by Josephine Comegna
No-Show at Insurer Examination Bars LAT Claim: O.H.A and Aviva General Insurance Company by Mallory Allan
Go to EUO But Don’t Answer Questions: That is a No Go – 17-002366 v Coachman by Diana McBey
Material Misrepresentation Exclusion Tough to Prove: 18-001028 v. Aviva Insurance Canada by Mallory Allan
Reconsideration Denied: Legality Of Third Party IE Vendors And Adjudicator Discretion In Hearing Formats by Gordon Lee
Don’t Believe Everything You Read: It Is Possible to Address Credibility in a Written Hearing by Josephine Comegna
Surprising the Panel at Divisional Court: Barnes v. Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund, 2019 ONSC 1782 (CanLII)
Late Claim By Insured for Retroactive Attendant Care Allowed with Interest: 18-000790 v. Jevco Insurance Co.
When Can “Big Brother” Be Watching You ….and Not Tell You about It? by Chantalle J. Youkhana
After The Event Insurance: Who Gets The Proceeds? Peter B. Cozzi Professional Corporation v. Szot, 2019 ONSC 1274 by Leah Dick
CAT IEs: How Many is Too Many?
But For Misstating the Test – “But For” is the Causation Test for Accident Benefits: Sabadash v State Farm
