Skip to main content

RP Blog

Costly Improper Cancellation of Auto Policy

The court’s decision in Allstate Insurance Company v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2020 ONSC 830, shows that automobile insurers must comply with statutory requirements when cancelling policies, or else there can be costly consequences. In May 2014, Allstate sent the claimant a notice by registered mail that his policy wouldRead More

Erin Crochetière at Trial

Congratulations to Erin Crochetière for a remarkable job cross-examining four witnesses at a trial last week – an impressive feat for a second year lawyer! Erin, along with Brian Sunohara, are counsel for a police force in a claim arising from alleged motor vehicle accident negligence, false arrest, and breach of Charter rights.Read More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we reviewed an appeal of a trial judge’s decision to not strike the jury at trial and to not declare a mistrial. We also a reviewed a case addressing what considerations must be taken into account for a lawyer to withdraw from representation of aRead More

Hourly Rate for Self-Represented Parties

In Rubner v. Waddington McLean & Co. Limited, 2020 ONSC 692, Justice Myers allowed a successful self-represented plaintiff to recover costs in the amount of $100 per hour. Justice Myers indicated that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation for time that would otherwise have been spent by a lawyer. TheRead More

Jocelyn Brogan’s Summary Judgment Motion

Jocelyn Brogan was counsel in a summary judgment motion in August 2019, related to claims arising from an accident involving 30 vehicles. Justice George recently released his decision in Haidari v. Seney et al., 2020 ONSC 698. Although Justice George did not dismiss the actions as against our clients, HisRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we went over a case dealing with a motion for production of an adverse costs insurance policy, and a case addressing the test for cross-examining a witness prior to trial. Motion for Production of Adverse Costs Insurance Policy Matthew Umbrio discussed the case of JamesRead More

When is a Defence to Crossclaim Required?

As a reminder to defence counsel, a crossclaim by a co-defendant needs to be examined to determine whether a defence to crossclaim is required. Unless the crossclaim is only for contribution and indemnity under the Negligence Act, a defence to crossclaim should be entered. In the personal injury realm, co-defendantsRead More

Judgment Granted Against Unidentified Defendants in Defamation Case

People who post defamatory statements on the Internet can be found liable for damages even if their identities are not known at the time of the court hearing. In Theralase Technologies Inc. v. Lanter, 2020 ONSC 205, the defendants posted defamatory statements on a website that was aimed at investors. TheRead More

Insurer Bound by Position on Priority

When an automobile insurer accepts priority for a statutory accident benefits claim, it is very difficult to withdraw or resile from that position except in extreme situations, such as when there is bad faith or deliberate misrepresentation. In Pembridge Insurance Company v. The Sovereign General Insurance Company, 2019 ONSC 7291, the injured claimantRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

This morning, at our muffin meeting, we discussed whether a plaintiff can be compelled to travel for a defence medical examination. We also discussed a motion involving a dispute between current and former partners of a law firm. Defence Medical Exam Denied Due to Travel Ankita Abraham addressed the caseRead More

Alon Barda in The Lawyer’s Daily

In an article called “Striking insurance claims against adjusters“, Alon Barda explains why insurance adjusters and other employees generally cannot be personally sued. This article was published in The Lawyer’s Daily.Read More

Rogers Partners Guide to Defending Claims in Ontario

Rogers Partners has prepared a comprehensive booklet called “Defending Claims in Ontario”. The topics covered in the booklet include: an overview of lawsuits in Ontario; cross-border issues; a primer on Ontario auto claims; third party liability coverage in the auto context; and Bill 18 – priority scheme for rental vehicles.Read More

Stephen Ross at The Tricks of the Trade

Stephen Ross co-chaired the Tricks of the Trade conference on Friday. This is a popular event put on each year by The Advocates’ Society. Stephen also moderated an informative panel on potential reforms to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. Stephen is a leader in this area. He’s been part ofRead More

Surveillance and Social Media Evidence

Brian Sunohara spoke at the The Advocates’ Society’s Tricks of the Trade conference. It was a great event with hundreds of attendees. Brian presented on surveillance and social media evidence at trial. Brian was co-counsel in the Ontario Court of Appeal’s latest decision on this topic, Nemchin v. Green. Based on thisRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At our muffin meeting, we discussed a decision which provides a very helpful summary of several important principles of evidence. In particular, in Schindler Elevator Corporation v. Walsh Construction Company of Canada, 2020 ONSC 433, the court stated: The truth-seeking function of the trial creates a starting premise that allRead More

Full Disclosure in Life Insurance Applications

The Court of Appeal released an interesting decision yesterday regarding the need to be fully candid in applications for life insurance. In Mohammad v. The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company, 2020 ONCA 57, the deceased was part of a terrorist group outside of Canada. In 1968, he stormed a civilian aircraft throwingRead More

Discovery Accommodations in Sexual Abuse Cases

Should a person accused of sexual abuse be permitted to sit in on the examination for discovery of the alleged victim? This issue was considered in G.S. v. K.C., 2020 ONSC 210. C.H. alleged that he was sexually abused by a family member when he was a minor. This was denied byRead More

What is the Collateral Fact Rule?

By Brian Sunohara The collateral fact rule is often misunderstood. As indicated by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. A.C., 2018 ONCA 333, the collateral fact rule has “historically suffered from confusion in its application”. In R. v. A.C., the Court of Appeal noted that the collateral factRead More

Can Plaintiffs Refuse to Complete Questionnaires at Defence Medical Exams?

Sometimes plaintiffs will only agree to attend defence medical exams if they do not have to sign anything or complete any forms. In Coll v. Robertson, 2020 ONSC 383, Justice Grace held that this is improper. His Honour said that, when plaintiffs attend defence medical exams, they must complete questionnairesRead More

Tom Macmillan in The Lawyer’s Daily

Tom Macmillan discusses the definition of “household” in a recent article that was published in The Lawyer’s Daily. Tom specifically addresses an interesting Court of Appeal decision involving a homeowners insurance policy.  Read More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we discussed a Court of Appeal decision involving a dispute over the limitation period in an LTD claim. We also went over a Court of Appeal decision which considered whether proper notice was given to the Crown in several class actions. Limitation Period in LTD DisputeRead More

Carol-Anne Wyseman in The Lawyer’s Daily

Carol-Anne Wyseman’s article called “Limitation period for duty to defend applications” was recently published in The Lawyer’s Daily. Carol-Anne provides her views on a surprising Court of Appeal decision.Read More

City of Toronto Not Liable for Skateboarding Accident

In Karpouzis v. Toronto (City of), 2020 ONSC 143, the plaintiff went skateboarding on a trail in a City of Toronto park in the middle of the night. The trail was dark. The plaintiff was 34 years old at the time. He was a very experienced skateboarder. He fell and sustainedRead More

Court’s Intervention Needed for Excessive Noise in Condo

The court’s decision in Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 933 v. Lyn, 2020 ONSC 196, involved two tenants in a high-rise condominium building in downtown Toronto. They are neighbours. After Kalicharan moved into her unit, Rosenstrom began to experience noise issues, such as extremely loud music and loud television shows comingRead More

Motion Denied: Insurer Not Required to Disclose Reserves

On Friday, the court released a decision that will be of interest to insurers and counsel handling first party claims. In Kanani v. Economical Insurance, 2019 ONSC 7201, the plaintiffs brought a motion to compel an insurer to produce reserve information in an accident benefits claim. Justice Nadeau denied thisRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

This morning, Meryl Rodrigues conducted an in-firm seminar on pleadings as part of our Litigation Strategy Series. Meryl went over issues to analyze before entering a statement of defence, including: Examining whether the client was properly named; Checking if the claim was issued in time; Assessing whether the court hasRead More

Welcome Back Gemma Healy-Murphy!

Rogers Partners is happy to welcome back Gemma Healy-Murphy! This is Gemma’s first week in the office following her maternity leave.Read More

Vicious Hockey Hit Costs Player $700,000

By Brian Sunohara Emotions can run high in sports, even in recreational adult leagues.  That is understandable due to the competitive nature of many athletes. However, players must play within the rules and spirit of the game.  Failing to do so can result in criminal charges and a significant monetaryRead More

Similar Fact Evidence

Plaintiffs sometimes attempt to rely on similar fact evidence to prove liability. Similar fact evidence is evidence of past misconduct of a defendant for the purpose of inferring that the defendant is liable for the incident in question. Similar fact evidence was addressed in the recent decision of SecurityInChina InternationalRead More

Exclusive Jurisdiction of LAT to Enforce SABS Settlements

In Riggs Estate v. Intact, 2019 ONSC 6846, the terms of a global settlement of a tort claim and an accident benefits claim were agreed to at a private mediation. The claimant unexpectedly died before executing a release and a Settlement Disclosure Notice with respect to the accident benefits claim. TheseRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At our muffin meeting this morning, we discussed a case wherein the lawyers for the plaintiff sought a charging order following a jury trial. We also went over a decision in which one of the issues was the test to withdraw admissions. Charging Order Denied Matthew Umbrio discussed the Court ofRead More

Alon Barda in Canadian Underwriter

Alon Barda was quoted in a Canadian Underwriter article yesterday regarding his opinion on a “highly questionable” special award ordered by the Licence Appeal Tribunal.  The article is called “Did the threshold for special awards against insurers just sink lower?“Read More

No Liability for Unusual Accident at Soccer Game

The trial decision in Onley v. Town of Whitby, 2020 ONSC 20, shows that unfortunate accidents can occur but that no one is liable. The plaintiff was 18 years old and was playing in a soccer game. She sustained an electric shock as she was sitting near a light poleRead More

Section 132 of Insurance Act: Direct Actions Against Insurers

Section 132 of the Insurance Act permits a plaintiff to commence a direct action against an insurer when an insured is liable for injury or damage and fails to satisfy a judgment, except in relation to motor vehicle liability policies. The plaintiff is subject to the same equities as the insurer would haveRead More

Surprising Special Award Against Insurer

A recent decision of the Licence Appeal Tribunal indicates that an insurer cannot simply rely on the opinions of assessors when determining a claimant’s needs. The adjudicator said that the insurer should have considered all relevant medical evidence and should have followed up with the assessors for clarification of theRead More

Test to Re-open Case at Trial

The decision in Loye v. Bowers, 2019 ONSC 7143, involved a jury trial in a personal injury action. Through inadvertence, the plaintiff did not enter his income tax returns into evidence before closing his case. The plaintiff brought a motion to re-open his case. Justice J.R. Turnbull took into account the factors outlined byRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

This morning, at our weekly muffin meeting, we discussed two very interesting cases dealing with costs. Apportionment of Costs Between Defendants Matthew Umbrio discussed the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bondy-Rafael v. Potrebic, 2019 ONCA 1026. The action arose out of an accident at a plaza. Two young plaintiffs were struck byRead More

No Opting Back Into Ontario SABS

When an automobile accident occurs outside of Ontario, in particular, in another province or territory of Canada, or in the United States, a claimant may elect to receive either Ontario-level benefits or benefits under the law of the jurisdiction where the accident occurred as if the person was a residentRead More

Happy New Year!

“Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow” – Albert Einstein. Rogers Partners wishes you a happy, healthy, and successful New Year! We hope you’re enjoying the RP Blog. We’ll have lots of updates in 2020!Read More

Limitation Period for Uninsured Automobile Coverage

In Rooplal v. Fodor, 2019 ONSC 7211, the Divisional Court agreed with the decision of the motion judge, Justice Chiappetta, that the limitation period for claims for uninsured automobile coverage only begins to run when the plaintiff makes a claim for indemnity to the insurer and the insurer fails to satisfyRead More

Standard of Review of Administrative Decisions: How the Supreme Court’s New Decision Applies in Ontario

Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada released a landmark decision which outlines a new test for the standard of review of decisions made by administrative bodies and tribunals. Brian Sunohara has written an article called “Standard of Review of Administrative Decisions: How the Supreme Court’s New Decision Applies in Ontario“.Read More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At our muffin meeting, we discussed a Divisional Court decision which those who handle statutory accident benefits claims have been waiting for. A previous decision of the Financial Services Commission of Ontario caused a great deal of controversy. The arbitrator held that the Minor Injury Guideline (“MIG”) in the Statutory AccidentRead More

Punitive Damages Award Overturned

A decision released by the Court of Appeal yesterday addresses the principles of punitive damages. In Cable Assembly Systems Ltd. v. Barnes, 2019 ONCA 1013, the Court of Appeal noted that punitive damages should only be awarded on an exceptional basis for “malicious, oppressive and high-handed misconduct that offends the court’sRead More

Happy Holidays!

As the year draws to a close, all of us at Rogers Partners would like to wish you a safe and happy holiday season! Thank you to everyone for a great 2019! We’re looking forward to 2020!Read More

From the Desk of Meryl Rodrigues

T’is the season for many things. Yes, of course, it’s the season of festive gatherings, gift-giving and all the feelings espoused in the holiday music playing overhead (or, if you subscribe to a more cynical perspective, the season of crowds, overindulgence and all of the hassles inherent of winter). NoRead More

Ugly Holiday Sweater Day!

There are some amazing sweaters in the office today for Ugly Holiday Sweater Day! After careful and spirited deliberations, the ugly sweater committee is pleased to announce that the winner of this year’s best sweater is Pam de Perio! Pam received a perfect 10 out of 10 for creativity for herRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

This morning, we had an “Ugly Holiday Sweater” edition of our weekly muffin meeting. We discussed a Court of Appeal decision involving coverage under a homeowner’s insurance policy. We also went over a decision in which a plaintiff sued a doctor and the Ministry of Health in relation to an allegedRead More

Expert Disclosure at Discovery Stage

In Galea v. Best Water Limited, 2019 ONSC 7213, the defendant requested production of certain “foundational information” of the plaintiff’s expert, including information on the type of testing performed, raw data, and photographs. The requirement to produce “foundational information” is mandated by rule 53.03(2.1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.Read More

Tricks of the Trade Conference

The annual Tricks of the Trade conference by The Advocates’ Society is coming up on January 31, 2020. Brian Sunohara will be speaking at the conference. His topic is “Surveillance and Social Media Evidence Update”. Brian was one of the lawyers involved in the Court of Appeal’s most recent decision onRead More

Costs Sanctions at Pre-Trial Conference

In Clarke v. Tennant, 2019 ONSC 7222, costs were ordered against one of three defendants at a pre-trial conference. The action arose out of a motor vehicle accident. At a mediation, the defendant, Silcox, was prepared to settle for a significant amount.  However, at the pre-trial conference, Silcox maintained aRead More

In|Sight – Winter 2019 Newsletter

We’re pleased to present the Winter 2019 edition of our quarterly newsletter, In|Sight! There are several interesting articles, which we hope you’ll find to be useful, plus news on the latest happenings at Rogers Partners. The topics in the newsletter are: Limitation Period for Duty to Defend Applications Striking ClaimsRead More

2019 Holiday Party!

Games, prizes, singing, great food, and, most importantly, terrific people. We had it all at our firm holiday party at Bymark! It was a fantastic day!Read More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we discussed the test for admitting an expert’s reply report after the expert has already testified at trial. We also considered a decision which addressed whether the court had jurisdiction over an employee’s LTD claim against her insurer or whether the claim is subject to theRead More

What is Loss of Competitive Advantage?

In Mundinger v. Ashton, 2019 ONSC 7161, one of the issues addressed was the definition of loss of competitive advantage and its relationship with loss of future income. Justice Charney noted that an award for loss of competitive advantage is expressed as damages in recognition of the fact that aRead More

Five Factors to Set Aside Dismissal of Appeal for Delay

In Davies v. The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington et al, 2019 ONSC 6895, Justice Woodley went over the test to set aside a registrar’s order dismissing an appeal for delay. The test is: whether the appellant had an intention to appeal within the time for bringing an appealRead More

Updated Lawyer Bio Photos

We’ve just updated our website bio photos. Check out our new Our Lawyers page!  Read More

Can Condos Stop Smoking on Balconies?

In Wellington Condo. Corp. No. 31 v. Silberberg et al, 2019 ONSC 6594, the Silberbergs smoked on their balcony from time to time. The condominium’s rules permitted smoking on balconies. However, the condominium began to receive complaints about smoking from other people living in the building. Due to the complaints, the applicableRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we discussed the test to set aside a default judgment. We also went over a Divisional Court case that addressed the effect of a sealing order on subsequent litigation. Setting Aside Default Judgments Ankita Abraham went over the five-part test to set aside a default judgment:Read More

Kudos to Nancy Buronyi!

Rogers Partners would like to give very special recognition to one of our legal assistants, Nancy Buronyi. For the past 25 years, Nancy has organized the charity events at our firm. This includes the annual Salvation Army Toy Drive, charity potluck lunches, and Casual Fridays for charity. Due to Nancy’sRead More

Exclusion From Discoveries

Parties to a lawsuit usually have the right to be present at the discoveries of all other parties. However, the court has discretion to order otherwise. In Findlay v. Yagminas, 2019 ONSC 6743, the court outlined the factors to consider in determining whether co-parties should be excluded from each other’s discoveries.Read More

Discoveries: Who Goes First?

Generally, the first party to serve a sworn affidavit of documents and a notice of examination is entitled to examine the opposing party for discovery before being examined himself or herself. However, the decision in Lambert v. Maracle, 2019 ONSC 7003, shows that, in order to rely on this rule,Read More

Employee Appreciation Celebration – 25 Years!

We had a fun employee appreciation wine and cheese yesterday as part of our 25th anniversary celebrations! In 1994, Rogers, Moore opened its doors after our founding partners wanted to start a new venture and decided to leave Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt. In 2005, Patrick Moore was appointed to theRead More

Prejudice and Dismissals for Delay

A plaintiff has five years to set an action down for trial, or else the action will be dismissed for delay by the registrar. If the action cannot be set down within five years, the parties can consent to a timetable at least 30 days prior to the expiry ofRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

This morning, at our muffin meeting, we discussed a Court of Appeal decision which provides guidance on the extent of a trial judge’s discretion regarding costs when a party beats an offer to settle. We also went over a decision involving a motion to strike certain portions of a claimRead More

Defendant Beats Offer by Over $100K – Appeal Dismissed

In Hadzic et al v. Croxford, 2019 ONSC 6839, the Divisional Court considered an appeal by the plaintiff following a jury trial arising from a motor vehicle accident. Prior to trial, the defendant offered to settle for $150,000, net of the deductible, plus costs. The jury awarded $15,000 for generalRead More

$210 Million Claim By Subway Dismissed Against CBC

Brian Sunohara has written an article called “Subway’s ‘50% Chicken’ Lawsuit Against CBC Dismissed“. The article addresses a very interesting lawsuit by Subway, arising out of comments by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that Subway’s chicken could contain only about 50% chicken. Justice Morgan held that the lawsuit had to beRead More

Rental Priority Rules Not Applicable to Listed Driver

Last week, the Court of Appeal released an important decision for rental car companies and their insurers. Section 277(1.1) of the Insurance Act contains a priority scheme for accidents involving rented or leased vehicles. The provision states as follows: (1.1) Despite subsection (1), if an automobile is leased, the followingRead More

Supreme Court Denies Leave in Oil Leak Case

The Supreme Court of Canada recently denied leave to appeal in the case of Gendron v. Doug C. Thompson Ltd. (Thompson Fuels).  This brings an end to a lawsuit that determined several important issues. Facts The case arose out of an oil leak. Approximately one week into trial, the plaintiffRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At our muffin meeting this morning, we discussed a controversial Court of Appeal decision addressing whether discoverability can apply to the limitation period in claims for statutory accident benefits. We also went over a Superior Court decision involving the doctrine of misnomer. Discoverability in SABS Claims Matthew Umbrio addressed the recentRead More

Coverage Under Homeowner’s Policy for Automobile-Related Incident

The case of Pembridge Insurance Company of Canada v. Chu, 2019 ONCA 904, arose out of a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff sued Fabrizi alleging that he drove through a red light and caused her injuries. Fabrizi commenced a third party claim against Chu. Fabrizi alleged that Chu drove negligently. FabriziRead More

Vicarious Liability and Punitive Damages

David Rogers and Carol-Anne Wyseman have written an informative paper entitled “Will Failure to Admit Liability in a Timely Fashion Give Rise to Punitive Damages? The Law after McCabe”. The paper addresses the principles of vicarious liability and punitive damages. David and Carol-Anne specifically examine a recent decision by theRead More

No Consent, No Uninsured Coverage

In Conners v. D’Angelo, 2019 ONCA 905, the plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver, without the permission of the owner. The plaintiff was injured in an accident and sued the driver, the owner of the vehicle, and the owner’s liability insurer. On a summaryRead More

Rogers Partners at the Santa Claus Parade

Rogers Partners had a fun time volunteering for The Advocates’ Society at the Santa Claus Parade yesterday! In conjunction with the parade, The Advocates’ Society held a special event at Campbell House with hot chocolate, cookie decorating, and holiday crafts. To the delight of many children in attendance, one ofRead More

Fridays With Rogers Partners

At this morning’s muffin meeting, we discussed file opening procedures as part of the Rogers Partners Litigation Strategy Series. Dana Eichler led this seminar. Dana addressed important issues for handling new files from the defence perspective, including: Immediately diarizing limitation periods Confirming instructions on who to defend Checking on whether ourRead More

Brian Sunohara in The Lawyer’s Daily

An article by Brian Sunohara on a recent Court of Appeal decision has been published.[1] The article is entitled “Defendant liable for plaintiff jumping out of bus”. The Court of Appeal upheld a finding of 75% liability on a bus company for an incident in which a grade 8 studentRead More