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.
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.
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.