Skip to main content

Denial of Natural Justice Leads to New LAT Hearing

In a reconsideration decision at the Licence Appeal Tribunal, the claimant successfully argued that a new hearing should be ordered due to a denial of nature justice.

In S.A. v. Guarantee Insurance, 2019 CanLII 77002, a combined written and oral hearing was conducted on consent. The matter dealt with entitlement to non-earner benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

At the conclusion of the evidence, the claimant’s representative indicated that he wished to make a closing argument.

The adjudicator denied this request stating that the parties agreed at a case conference that their written submissions comprised their closing arguments. The claimant’s representative denied agreeing to this.

In the reconsideration decision, the member stated that the adjudicator did not conduct the case conference and, in the face of the claimant’s denial that he consented to an order dispensing with oral argument, he should have allowed same.

The member referred to a court decision which indicates that a party should be given the opportunity, not only to call evidence, but to present submissions or arguments before a decision is rendered.

Along with a denial of natural justice, the duty of fairness was also relevant. The matter was of considerable importance to the claimant. The decision process could easily have accommodated the request to make closing submissions.

As a result, a new hearing was ordered before a different adjudicator.