Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 JUNE 2010

Threshold Decision Case: "Bella Gyorffy v. Marion Drury"

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Contributor
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

With over 750 lawyers, intellectual property agents and other professionals, BLG services...

View firm profile
Explore more from Borden Ladner Gervais LLP

This recent decision of Justice Lemon of the Ontario Superior Court, dated June 8, 2010, signals the importance of adducing evidence from lay witnesses where a plaintiff is seeking to establish that their accident related injuries meet the statutory threshold within the meaning of Bill 198.

CanadaInsurance

This recent decision of Justice Lemon of the Ontario Superior Court, dated June 8, 2010, signals the importance of adducing evidence from lay witnesses where a plaintiff is seeking to establish that their accident related injuries meet the statutory threshold within the meaning of Bill 198.

In this decision the plaintiff's failure to adduce evidence from a lay witness, to corroborate a change in the plaintiff's function, was fatal even where the plaintiff had been able to satisfy the Court that their accident related injuries reflected a permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental or psychological function. The finding that the plaintiff failed to satisfy the threshold was based entirely on the fact that the plaintiff had failed to satisfy the evidentiary burden under section 4.3(5) of Bill 198 more properly known as Regulation 381/03 ("the Regulation").

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from