Learn how Varriano changed SABS notice requirements and when insurers must provide medical and other reasons for accident benefits determinations.
accident benefits
No Crash, No Cash: Divisional Court Denies Bus Injury Benefits
Is a public transit rider entitled to accident benefits for injuries inside the vehicle? The Divisional Court confirms not unless the vehicle collided with “another automobile or any other object”. This decision clarifies when accident benefits are available for bus...
LAT: Is a Mobility Scooter an “Automobile” in Ordinary Parlance?
Mobility scooter or automobile? The Ontario LAT in Bartok v Intact says “automobile” under the ordinary parlance test. A critical look at the decision and its implications for accident benefits and insurance.
When Minor Isn’t Minor: Why Context Matters in MIG Classification
The Divisional Court in Marcelo clarifies that MIG classification is injury-based, not impairment-based. Context is critical in accident benefits files.
The Nexus Test in Ontario Accident Benefits: Wilson and Wais
Two Coachman decisions appear to point in opposite directions on nexus and priority. They don’t. Wilson and Wais reveal a disciplined framework reshaping how accident benefits claims are adjudicated at the LAT.
Court: Coffee Car Coverage Case Confirmed
The Ontario Divisional Court has allowed an appeal in an accident benefits coverage case, confirming that a claimant who was injured from spilled coffee in a McDonald’s drive-through was involved in an automobile “accident”. In Miceli v. TD Insurance, the claimant was...
Ice is Back with a Brand New Accident Benefits Coverage Decision
This article was initially posted in May 2021. Does slipping on ice next to a vehicle come within the definition of accident under Ontario's statutory accident benefits scheme? Ok Stop. Collaborate and, ummmmm .....read. The Divisional Court has weighed into the (Ice)...