Miller Thomson Blogs put a more conversational lens on Canadian law. See the diverse perspectives of our lawyers here.
On April 19, 2011, Sony suffered a massive breach in its video game online network that led to the theft of names, addresses and possibly credit card data belonging to 77 million user accounts. The company could not rule out […]
The Ontario Court of Appeal released a decision today discussing the meaning of “other material evidence” and “independent witness evidence” under the OPCF 44R (Family Protection Endorsement). In Pepe v. State Farm, Massimo Pepe was injured in a single-car accident. Shirley Aguirre, […]
Markel and Co-operators (March 31, 2011 – Samis) Markel had not commenced arbitration within one year. It argued that the Limitations Act applies and not Ontario Regulation 283/95. Section 7 of Ontario Regulation 283/95 requires the insurer to initiate arbitration […]
UPDATE — Bill 173 received Royal Assent on May 12, 2011. Accordingly, these important changes to the Insurance Act are now in effect. On March 29, 2011, the Ontario Legislature unveiled its pre-election budget, in Bill 173, otherwise known as the […]
On April 9, 2010, Mr. Justice J.P. Moore held in Beasley v. Barrand that the tort defendant could not call experts retained by the accident benefit insurer to give opinion evidence at trial because their reports did not comply with Rule […]
This week’s Ontario Reports contained an interesting coverage decision involving Ontario’s Family Protection Endorsement and claims against the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund. In Graham v. Superintendent of Financial Services Commission of Ontario (2010 ONSC 7129), Christine Graham was riding her bicycle […]
FSCO formed the “Catastrophic Impairment Expert Panel” to study and make recommendations on the definition of catastrophic impairment. Their preliminary report was released on April 15, 2011. The panel reported that combining physical and mental/behavioural conditions cannot be achieved […]
The Court of Appeal for British Columbia recently released an interesting decision significantly reducing a trial judge’s award for future care costs. This decision could have an impact on similar claims in Ontario. The Plaintiff was injured in a 2005 […]
This blog sets out a variety of materials relating to the law to be used for educational and non-commercial purposes only; the author(s) of this blog do not intend the blog to be a source of legal advice. Please retain and seek the advice of a lawyer and use your own good judgement before choosing to act on any information included in the blog. If you choose to rely on the materials, you do so entirely at your own risk.
