Apr 1, 2017
Congratulations to Hughes Amys' Shikha Sharma on her successful result before the Licence Appeal Tribunal in an IRBs claim
Author Michael S. Teitelbaum
Related Lawyers Shikha Sharma and Linda Kiley
Hearty Congratulations and a tip of the advocacy chapeau to our Shikha Sharma for her second recent success before the Licence Appeal Tribunal!
In D.D.D. and RBC Insurance Company, it was held that the applicant was not entitled to income replacement benefits.
Our Linda Kiley observes that this was one of the earliest LAT hearings and is noteworthy because the Adjudicator permitted the applicant, the family doctor and a chronic pain specialist to give evidence at an oral hearing.
After considering all of the evidence, the Adjudicator accepted Shikha’s submission that the applicant was not working after the accident due to being laid off for reasons unrelated to the accident. The Adjudicator held that the applicant had failed to prove her entitlement to IRBs and dismissed her application.
A non-cuttable and non-pasteable version of the decision is attached.
Adjudicator Gottfried addressed certain evidentiary issues, holding that any documents that were not produced on time prior to the hearing could not be relied upon at the hearing, but did allow documents produced at the case conference to be used. The Adjudicator also allowed the family doctor to testify on the clinical notes and records that had been submitted in evidence, although there was a prior understanding the doctor would give evidence via affidavit. Shikha prepared her cross-examination on short notice and advised the Adjudicator she had sufficient time to prepare and was not prejudiced.
The Adjudicator found that "she did not suffer from a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident employment tasks and that she was not working because she was laid off. There was no evidence before me that she was laid off because of an inability to perform her employment tasks and, in fact the applicant testified she continued to look for work between layoffs and was available to work if a position was available".
The BLAWG on this website and the material published on it, including the links to other websites, are made available by the lawyer and law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give the BLAWG's readers general information and a general understanding of the law, and not to provide specific legal advice. This BLAWG is for general informational purposes only, and use of this BLAWG does not create a Lawyer-Client Relationship. Hughes Amys LLP is a law firm and most of the information on the BLAWG relates to legal topics and cases. Hughes Amys LLP does not offer or dispense legal advice through this BLAWG or by e-mails directed to or from this site. By using the BLAWG, the reader agrees that the information on this BLAWG does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no lawyer-client or other relationship is created between the reader and Hughes Amys LLP or its lawyers. The BLAWG is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified lawyer. The information on the BLAWG may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. While the BLAWG is revised on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. Any comments, views or opinions expressed at or through the BLAWG are intended to provide general commentary on the law and legal issues, and are not intended for or should be understood as being posted for any other purpose. The BLAWG should not be used as a substitute for securing appropriate legal advice from a licensed professional lawyer in respect of particular facts and circumstances. Please use your own good judgment before choosing to act on any information included in the BLAWG, doing so entirely at your own risk.