Simon's Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

EVIDENCE | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Something Big

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers


TOPICS

(What's a Topic?)

Insurance (Auto) - Remoteness

. Pourkhodayar v. The Personal Insurance Company

In Pourkhodayar v. The Personal Insurance Company (Div Court, 2024) the Divisional Court allowed a LAT SABS appeal/JR, here where the applicant "was denied on the basis that she had not been involved in an “accident” as defined in s. 3(1)".

Here the court considered a 'dominant feature' (remoteness) issue:
[32] As explained in Davis, at paras. 75-76, the dominant feature question is directed at determining whether the link between the use or operation of the automobile and the resulting impairment was too remote to be called “direct”: see also Greenhalgh, at para. 12. The court also confirmed that there may be more than one direct cause: Davis, at para. 77, citing North Waterloo Farmers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Samad, 2018 ONSC 2143, 77 C.C.L.I. (5th) 60 (Div. Ct.), at para. 13.

CC0

Unless authorship is otherwise stated or obvious from the context, all
written materials in this website were created by Simon Shields, who
waives all of his copyright and related or neighboring rights to this
Isthatlegal.ca webpage. Note in particular that this waiver only applies to
Simon's material, as copyright in statutory/regulatory materials and
case extracts were never his to give away.




Last modified: 14-11-24
By: admin