SHILLINGTONS LLP

DECISIONS

Frank v. Central Elgin (Municipality), (2010), 268 O.A.C. 85, 99 M.V.R. (5th) 1, 73 M.P.L.R. (4th) 1, [2010] O.J. No. 3796 (C.A.) (QL). In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeal for Ontario upheld the trial judgment in Frank v. Municipality of Central Elgin (where Shillingtons LLP also acted as trial counsel), and affirmed the standard of care applicable to municipalities in the winter road maintenance context.

Kejay Investments Ltd. v. Frank Montgomery et at.,,(21 May, 2010), Chatham 3244/05 (Ont. S.C.J.). This was a successful defence of a motion for production of an insurance company’s legal opinions on coverage. The Plaintiffs’ argument that solicitor-client privilege over the opinions had been waived through allegations of bad faith was rejected by the motion’s judge, and a subsequent application for leave to appeal the decision was dismissed: # Ontario Ltd. et al v. Montgomery et. al, 2010 ONSC 6476.

Docherty et al. v. Lauzon et al., [2010] O.J. No. 5017, [2010] ONSC 1006 (S.C.J.). This case involved the successful defence of a municipality from a claim in negligence arising from the condition of a gravel roadway. In dismissing the claim, Campbell J. extensively discussed the standard of care of a road authority as it applies to rural highways and low-use roads.

J.S. v. Guarantee Company of North America, [2010] O.F.S.C.D. No. 105 (Ontario Financial Services Commission) (QL). This was a F.S.C.O. arbitration decision dealing with the interpretation and application of the limitation on rehabilitation benefits for the purchase of a new home contained in section 15(8) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

Guarantee Company of North America v. Wawanesa Insurance Company and Zurich Insurance. (7 May, 2010, Arbitrator Lee Samis). This was a priority dispute arbitration where it was held that a no-fault benefits claimant who was a society ward of a child welfare agency was not a dependent, legally or factually, on the agency for the purposes of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

Gigliotti v. Fantino, [2010] O.J. No. 875 (S.C.J.) (QL). This case involved the successful defence of a police services board from a claim in negligence, false arrest and false imprisonment arising from deployment of a police emergency response unit in the course of a murder investigation.

Gore Mutual Insurance Co. v. Guarantee Company of North America, (22 May, 2009, Arbitrator Lee Samis). This was a priority dispute where it was held that a public transit bus was not "made available" for the use of its regular passengers for the purposes of no-fault benefits entitlement. The arbitrator's award was subsequently upheld on appeal: Gore v. Guarantee, (2010), 86 C.C.L.I. (4th) 279, [2010] O.J. No. 2925 (S.C.J.) (QL).

Anderson v. Hamilton (City), (2009), 64 M.P.L.R. (4th) 77, [2009] O.J .No. 4358 (S.C.J.). This case involved the successful defence of a claim against a municipality arising from a trip and fall incident on a sidewalk. At trial, it was proven that there was no dangerous condition on the sidewalk, and that the municipal defendant had a reasonable system of inspection and maintenance in place.

Essex Condominium Corp. No. 43 v. LaSalle, (2009), 69 M.P.L.R. (4th) 44, [2009] O.J. No. 5754 (S.C.J.) (QL). This case involved the successful defence of a municipality from a claim of negligent building inspection. It was held at trial that the municipality had a valid defence based on its policy to rely on the stamp and seal of third party engineers on submitted plans as proof that they complied with the Ontario Building Code and good design practices.

Charlton v. St. Thomas Police Services Board, (2009), 190 C.R.R. (2d) 103, [2009] O.J. No. 2132 (S.C.J.). This case involved a claim in negligence and false arrest against a police service that was dismissed via a summary judgment motion.

ING Insurance v. Guarantee Company of North America, (21 January, 2009 – Arbitrator Craig Brown). This was a priority dispute arbitration where is was held that a no-fault benefits claimant could not be considered a "dependent" on a non-natural entity (in this case, a child welfare agency).

Frank v. Municipality of Central Elgin, (2009), 55 M.P.L.R. (4th) 149, [2009] O.J. No. 220 (S.C.J.). This case involved the successful defence of a municipality from a claim arising from winter road conditions. It was demonstrated that the municipality met the standard of care applicable, and that it was not negligence despite the existence of icy conditions on one of its arterial roads.

Potter v. Ozols, [2008] O.J. No. 5824 (S.C.J.), aff’d [2009] O.J. No. 5184 (Div. Ct.). This case involved the successful trial of a subrogated action arising from flood damage to a residence. Liability was established without the use of expert evidence, and the trial decision was ultimately upheld on appeal.

Co-operators v. Guarantee Company of North America, (12 November 2008), Toronto 07-CV-344846 (Ont. S.C.J.). This was a successful priority dispute arbitration that was upheld on appeal.

Lee v. Bott, [2008] O.J. No. 1517 (S.C.J.). This case involved the successful application of an intentional act exclusion in a liability policy to a situation where the insured had caused fire damage to the Plaintiff’s property.

BULLETINS

Limitation Periods: Statutory Accident Benefits (Shillingtons LLP Insurance Law Bulletin – July, 2009)

Statutory Accident Benefits: Entitlement to Non-Earner Benefits Clarified (Shillingtons LLP Insurance Law Bulletin – July, 2009)

Defence Costs: Covered and Uncovered Claims (Shillingtons LLP Insurance Law Bulletin – January, 2009)

Accident Benefits and Limitation Periods (Shillingtons LLP Tort Law Bulletin – April, 2010)

SABS Catastrophic Impairment Update (Shillingtons LLP Tort Law Bulletin – February, 2011)

PAPERS, ARTICLES, and PRESENTATIONS

Website design by BusinessTech