• FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education
  • FAIR – supporting auto accident victims through advocacy and education

Latest News Articles

February 4, 2020

by Admin2
 

No Weight Given to “Simply Conclusory” Defence Medical Opinion

Adding to this site’s archived posts of judicial criticism of expert witness advocacy or otherwise unsatisforcy expert opinions, reasons for judgement were recently brought to my attention finding that ‘no weight‘ should be attached to an expert that provided a ‘simply conclusory‘ opinion. 
 
_________________________________________________________________

Navigating the LAT Regime – Traps for unfamiliar lawyers

Even when a case falls into an area of law in which a lawyer is experienced, a new or unfamiliar administrative regime can present risks for lawyers not prepared for the particular statutory framework. Importantly, missing key details and requirements can lead to malpractice claims from inadequate investigation or communication failures with clients. 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Insurer Seeks Costs from “Suspended” ATE Policy & Plaintiff Lawyer Personally

Auto Insurers in Ontario continue their dogged pursuit of costs from After the Event legal expense insurance (“ATE”) policies despite ongoing resistance to paying the associated premiums in settled cases. In the most recent example of Loye v Bowers,[1] released on January 23, 2020, Justice Turnbull addressed the novel issue of “suspension” of an ATE policy just days before the commencement of trial and went so far as to call the ATE broker representative to give evidence on a motion. The decision also highlights the possibility of an ATE insurer and plaintiff counsel potentially using or threatening cancellation of coverage to influence a plaintiff’s decision to proceed to trial. 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Personal injury lawyers continue to be frustrated by jury rules

While the changes to the small claims court and the simplified procedure have been heralded for having the potential to cut wait times for trials, there is another benefit to the changes for personal injury lawyers. 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Battle rages over whether private or public auto insurance is cheaper

The Insurance Brokers Association of British Columbia (IBABC) disputes the conclusions published in a recent report that B.C. drivers are paying up to 42% more for their auto insurance than those in neighbouring Alberta. 
 
________________________________________________________________

the charles smith blog

Technology: The courtroom: Jurors and the perils of googling. My former Toronto Star colleague Betsy Powell – one of the finest reporters on crime and the courts – takes on the perils of Google – when accessed by jurors for information which has not been presented to them in court….”Despite judge’s instructions against hunting for information online, juror googling continues to bedevil the justice system, sometimes forcing mistrials or worse, verdicts that could be based on misleading or false information gleaned from the internet. Yet with dozens of jury trials scheduled in 2020 at downtown Toronto’s Superior courthouse, some legal insiders feel not enough is being done to ensure jurors not conduct their own research into a case.

_______________________________________________________________

Why your walk-in clinic visits could mean trouble for your family doctor, and you

You’ve woken to a throat so sore you can barely swallow. Time to find a nearby walk-in clinic? Sure, it will probably be easier than trying to get in to see your family doctor. But if you live in Ontario, that walk-in clinic visit could hurt your doctor and put you at risk of being “de-rostered.” 
 
______________________________________________________________

Cranioelectrical Stimulation for Concussion and PTSD

I wrote back in July about audiovisual entrainment (AVE), one of the neuroplastic treatments for my brain injury that my psychologist introduced me to. He also used what he called “alpha-TENS,” which I now know as cranioelectrical stimulation or CES. 
 
_______________________________________________________________

Five ideas Maytree would like to see in Ontario’s next Poverty Reduction Strategy

While we don’t know the government’s own ideas for its poverty reduction efforts, we do know that we need to address poverty in our province – urgently. We can’t miss this opportunity to table some important ideas that can reduce poverty and prioritize the dignity of people living in poverty. 
 
 
________________________________________________________________
 
Syed v. Petrie, 2020 ONSC 664 (CanLII), <http://canlii.ca/t/j50wj  
 

[4]       This action involves a motor vehicle accident that occurred on June 19, 2008. Liability and damages remain in dispute.

[5]       Surveillance has been conducted on the Plaintiff since 2009 and many reports prepared accordingly. On February 2, 2016, the Plaintiff produced to the Defendant the following:

a)        A report dated December 23, 2009 containing surveillance for December 16, 17, and 19, 2009;

b)        A report dated July 17, 2012 containing surveillance for June 27 and 28, 2012 and July 5, 6, 7, 10, and 11, 2012;

c)        A report dated August 7, 2012 containing surveillance for July 27, 2012 and August 1, 2012;

d)        A report dated August 26, 2013, containing surveillance for May 3 and 4, 2013; July 18 and 23, 2013; and August 7, 19, and 21, 2013;

e)        A report dated October 3, 2013 containing surveillance for September 24, 25, 26, and 27, 2013;

f)         A report dated September 24, 2014 containing surveillance for September 5, 6, 15, 16, and 17, 2014;

g)        A report dated September 30, 2014 which was an addendum to the report of September 24, 2014; and

h)        A report dated May 25, 2015 containing surveillance for April 23, 27, 28, and 29, 2015 and May 5, 2015.

[6]       The Defendant also produced the following reports on May 17, 2017:

a)        A report dated October 3, 2016 contained surveillance for September 27, 28, and 30, 2016; and

b)        A report dated November 28, 2016 contained surveillance for November 23, 25 and 26, 2016.

[7]       On July 12, 2018, the Defendant produced a report dated February 21, 2018 containing surveillance for February 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, 2018.

[8]       On September 11, 2018, the Defendant produced the following:

a)        A report dated October 4, 2016 containing surveillance for September 12, 13, and 14, 2016; and

b)        A report dated January 16, 2018 contained surveillance for December 12, 13, and 14, 2017.

[9]       The trial in this matter was scheduled to start on January 6, 2020. On January 1, 2020, Plaintiff’s counsel wrote to Defendant’s counsel and asked for confirmation that they had been served with all surveillance on which the Defendant intended to rely. The Plaintiff had already prepared his witnesses based on the surveillance in their possession. They also asked whether there were other occasions for which a report had been prepared and not yet provided.

[10]       In response, on January 3, 2020, the Defendant served a surveillance report dated December 26, 2019, which contained surveillance from December 19, 20 and 21, 2019 (“December 2019 Report”). The Defendants indicated that they received it from their investigator on January 2, 2020. They waived privilege over the report and turned it over to the Plaintiff the next day. 

[11]       On or about January 5, 2020, a further surveillance report dated January 3, 2020 was received by the Defendant. The Defendant waived privilege on the report immediately and provided it to Plaintiff’s counsel by e-mail. An actual copy of the video surveillance was provided to the Plaintiff on January 6, 2020. This latter report contained surveillance from December 30 and 31, 2019 and January 2, 2020 (“January 2020 Report”).

Comments are closed.