Wilneff v. Maritime Life Assurance Company

Wilneff v. Maritime Life Assurance Company

The court ordered the plaintiff to submit to an IME by Dr. Rosenberg in Halifax because the defendant demonstrated a reasonable choice of expert and the plaintiff and her psychiatrist failed to provide sufficient, specific evidence to justify refusal or relocation of the examination; therefore the defendant’s prima...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2003 NSSC 218
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Mary Pauline Wilneff; Defendant/applicant: The Maritime Life Assurance Company
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury / Insurance (long Term Disability) / Application for Medical Examination Under Rule 22.01 (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application granted in part for the Defendant; Plaintiff ordered to attend IME in Halifax by Dr. Rosenberg; Defendant awarded costs.
Legal Topics
Independent Medical Examination, Expert Selection, Civil Procedure Rule 22.01, Privacy and Bodily Integrity Vs. Litigation Preparation
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Insurance Law Evidence/medical Examinations Independent Medical Examination Expert Selection Civil Procedure Rule 22.01 Privacy and Bodily Integrity Vs. Litigation Preparation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Pauline Wilneff

Plaintiff/respondent

The Maritime Life Assurance Company

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury / Insurance (long Term Disability) / Application for Medical Examination Under Rule 22.01 (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant is entitled to choose its own psychiatrist for an IME
  2. 2 Whether IME must be conducted in Halifax or locally in Sydney
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff’s and treating psychiatrist’s objections justify refusing defendant’s chosen expert

Ratio Decidendi

The court ordered the plaintiff to submit to an IME by Dr. Rosenberg in Halifax because the defendant demonstrated a reasonable choice of expert and the plaintiff and her psychiatrist failed to provide sufficient, specific evidence to justify refusal or relocation of the examination; therefore the defendant’s prima facie right to its chosen expert prevailed and costs were awarded to the defendant.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part for the Defendant; Plaintiff ordered to attend IME in Halifax by Dr. Rosenberg; Defendant awarded costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff to attend an independent medical examination by Dr. Edwin Rosenberg in Halifax at a time and date to be set by the Court.
  • Defendant to pay reasonable travel expenses including hotel accommodation; $300 travel allowance and up to $50 for meals with receipts.