In Hamad v. Security National Insurance Company (Ont Div Ct, 2026) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a joint LAT SABS appeal-JR, this where the "LAT determined that the Appellant was not an “insured person” as defined in s. 3(1) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule".
The court considered a procedural fairness issue, here where the LAT decided a "preliminary issue hearing conducted pursuant to written submissions":
(i) Did the LAT commit a material breach of procedural fairness by denying the Appellant an oral hearing?
[11] The issue of whether the Appellant was an “insured person” was determined at a preliminary issue hearing conducted pursuant to written submissions.
....
[14] The LAT is entitled to control its own process in accordance with the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.S.22. The Licence Appeal Tribunal Rules, which are to be liberally interpreted as described in R. 3.1, provide for hearings in writing. I cannot find that the procedural decision to address the preliminary issue in writing was unfair. As the LAT outlined in its factum at para. 53, “as the LAT has experience and expertise in controlling its process, it is entitled to deference on its procedural choices that fall within the bounds of fairness”.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
