Winter 2010/11 – The Superintendent of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario FSCO on his own initiative struck a committee made up of hand-picked medical experts with the request that they make recommendations to change the longstanding definition applied to injured car crash victims who sought the CAT impairment definition. Spring 2011 – The Expert […]...Read More
Seriously injured crash victims will have a tougher time getting money to help get better under changes the province is considering, a London lawyer warns. A panel from the Financial Services Commission of Ontario is recommending insurance changes that would reduce the number of life-altering injuries that would be deemed catastrophic. If the changes are […]...Read More
On September 1, 2010, a number of significant changes to auto insurance in Ontario took effect, which dramatically reduced the benefits available when someone suffers a personal injury in an automobile accident. Now, benefits that were part of the standard policy of auto insurance have been shifted instead onto a menu of numerous optional benefits, […]...Read More
At least one Ontario court location has decided not to implement Rule 48 of the Rules of Civil Procedure this month after concerns about bureaucratic red tape and confusion over its wording cast a chill over the change that threatened to cause dismissals of a wave of civil actions. Rule 48 first surfaced in October […]...Read More
With seven months under their belts since significant new changes to the Statutory accident Benefits Schedule SABS) were introduced in Ontario last September, lawyers, adjusters, health care providers and accident victims are only beginning to see the real life consequences of the new SABS.
...Read More
This paper, and the National Expert Witness Academy lectures and workshops, focus on experts who will be giving evidence, but it is worth noting that there are certainly other roles for an expert to play.
...Read More
This paper supplements the panel discussion that I am having with Harry Brown, who brings a defence perspective, and Dr. Harold Becker, a preeminent medical expert particularly in the area of catastrophic impairments. I represent the plaintiff perspective in this discussion. Our panel discussion is meant to focus on the recent case law dealing with the retaining and communicating with expert witnesses, tips and tactics for the preparation of your expert for trial, and "killer cross-examinations". That is a lot of material to cover in a one-hour panel discussion, so it is my hope that this paper might say some of the things that I won't get a chance to mention during our lively debate and discussion.
...Read More
Beginning with the OMPP back in 1990 and certainly continuing through to the current Bill 198, motor vehicle litigation demands that the accident benefit file and the tort action be coordinated, "hand in glove", with one another. This paper explores some of the current considerations I bring to my own plaintiff practice.
...Read More
The Discovery process in long-term disability "LTD") actions is a specialized exercise. While the Rules of Civil Procedure apply equally to an LTD action as it would to a commercial case, certain rules and judicial rulings are more applicable than others. This article will highlight the Rules and some of the recent case law, unique to LTD actions, with which all LTD counsel need to be familiar. While it is beyond the scope of this article to deal with the issue of pleadings, it is still worth mentioning that the Discovery process is entirely set up by and anchored to the underlying pleadings. Give due thought to the particularized complaint to be advanced and ensure your pleadings will permit the full line of Discovery you seek.
...Read More
Despite a well-developed body of literature, academic research, and practical study in the area of psychological disability - all of which acknowledges how debilitating a psychological disability can be - the clients whom I represent still seem to face an extra rigorous level of scrutiny when their primary complaint relates to a psychological disability. There remains an underlying notion that a claimant with a psychological disability must suffer from a weakness of character, lack of motivation, or is otherwise personally responsible for not working.
...Read More