Mercier v. Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Company of Canada

Mercier v. Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Company of Canada

The trial judge's factual findings were not palpably or overridingly erroneous; on the evidence the plaintiff was substantially unable to perform caregiver duties for the periods found, the insurer was required to provide an LECB offer effective August 1998, and s.68 compound interest applies to overdue weekly...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
C39902
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Mary Mercier; Defendant (appellant): Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Company of Canada
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard and Decided)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (sabs), Caregiver Benefits, Loss of Earning Capacity Benefits (lecb), Compound Interest on Overdue Benefits, Designated Assessment Centre (dac) Assessments, Standard of Appellate Review
Source Language
english
Insurance Law Personal Injury Administrative Law Civil Procedure Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (sabs) Caregiver Benefits Loss of Earning Capacity Benefits (lecb) Compound Interest on Overdue Benefits +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Mercier

Plaintiff (respondent)

Royal & Sunalliance Insurance Company of Canada

Defendant (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard and Decided)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff satisfied the caregiver disability test between May 11, 1996 and July 26, 2000
  2. 2 Whether plaintiff was substantially unable to carry out caregiving activities after July 26, 2000 given intermittent relief from Botox
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff was entitled to an LECB and whether insurer was required to make an LECB offer effective August 1998

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's factual findings were not palpably or overridingly erroneous; on the evidence the plaintiff was substantially unable to perform caregiver duties for the periods found, the insurer was required to provide an LECB offer effective August 1998, and s.68 compound interest applies to overdue weekly caregiver benefits notwithstanding a prior negative DAC report and insurer termination of payments.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the respondent