October 17, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Accident benefit insurers may still be responsible for the cost of rebuttal reports in relation to accidents governed by automobile policies predating Sept. 1, 2010, when legislative amendments removed the payment obligation, Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur writes in Law Times.
“In the recent case of R.J. v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Co., Financial Services Commission of Ontario arbitrator John Wilson faced a motion for interim income replacement benefits...
October 2, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
As the Ontario government continues to consider an overhaul of its definition of “catastrophic impairment,” (CAT), a fear exists that efforts over the last 15 years to establish consistency and predictability in applying the test will be lost, says Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur.
At this year’s annual Back to School conference on Sept. 12, Merkur provided an update on the topic by revisiting his 2012 paper titled The Anticipated Changes To The Definition of...
September 6, 2013 by David Payne
Since October 1, 2003 with the enactment of Ontario Regulation 281/03, the catastrophic determination for children under the age of 16 has been subject to special considerations. The issue is what are those special considerations and how do we apply them to an infant’s catastrophic assessment?
For a finding of catastrophic impairment arising from injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident in Ontario, and the enhanced accident benefits that flow from such a finding, the definition is as...
July 11, 2013 by David MacDonald
Ian W. K. Furlong
Courts and Arbitrators have helped us to understand how the definition of catastrophic impairment may apply to individuals who suffer very severe injuries in motor vehicle accidents. These same decisions have helped us to understand that clinical findings by treating and assessing health care professionals are integral to the process of evaluating whether a person has sustained a catastrophic impairment.
The goal of this...
June 3, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
It is important to remember that Catastrophic Impairment is a legal definition, not a medical one. Therefore, what does or does not represent catastrophic impairment cannot be based on “science”, nor can it be based on medical opinion. That is the essence of the discussion at hand.
Much of what is being contemplated in the redefinition is an attempt to cloak Policy as Science. If it is Policy to change the definition, so be it. FSCO should be honest and declare its intent to the 12 million...
May 29, 2013 by David Payne
Adam J. Tanel
Associate, Thomson, Rogers
The accident benefits maze is difficult to navigate at the best of times. This is especially true for victims of a traumatic brain injury (TBI). The Ontario Government recognized this special vulnerability with a 2010 regulation that declared that any individual with a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) reading of 9 or less (as the result of a collision) is automatically deemed to be catastrophically impaired.
The purpose of this regulation was to create a “bright...
March 14, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Dr. Harold Becker, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto has written an opinion paper regarding the “redefinition” of Catastrophic Impairment, which is going to be discussed at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) Roundtable this Friday.
Read Dr. Becker’s paper here.
February 11, 2013 by Thomson Rogers
Seriously injured accident benefit claimants in Ontario no longer are required to dispute a “catastrophic impairment” denial within two years from the date of the denial, according to a recent arbitration decision, Toronto plaintiff’s personal injury lawyer Darcy Merkur writes in Lawyers Weekly. Read Lawyers Weekly
“Because qualifying as having suffered a ‘catastrophic impairment’ allows an Ontario motor vehicle accident claimant to essentially...