Recommendations of FSCO Released

The release of the five year review of motor vehicle insurance by FSCO was released today by the Superintendent of FSCO. The report contains 39 recommendations for the reform of auto insurance. Significantly for innocent accident victims, the Superintendent's suggestions include: 1. Reducing the deductible on non-pecuniary general damages from $30,000 to $20,000; 2. Reducing the deductible on Family Law Act claims from $15,000 to $10,000; 3. Eliminating the $15,000 deductible on fatal accident claims; and 4. Revoking the regulation defining the verbal threshold. In sum, it would appear that this will increase access to justice by innocent accident victims. To discuss your personal injury \ motor vehicle accident case, call Todd K. Plant, Ottawa Personal Injury & Motor Vehicle Accident Lawyer, 613-563-1131, www.pqtlaw.com

City Found Grossly Negligent in Slip and Fall Incident

Plaintiff fell as a result of ice on municipal property and the municipality was found not to have met the standard of care of a municipality and the Plaintiff was entitled to damages as a result. The City was found not to have used its resources already in place to properly inspect and maintain the property and was thus grossly negligent. The Plaintiff was entitled to damages. At Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, we handle municipal liability cases regularly. There are special limitation periods that may apply to cases against municipalities. For assistance in cases against municipalities, please contact us at 613-563-1131 (Marc-Nicholas Quinn - Accident Lawyer - Municipal Liability Lawyer).

Working and Still Meeting Threshold Under Insurance Act

Under the provisions of the Insurance Act, you can only sue for personal injuries arising from a motor vehicle accident if you meet a high legal threshold: a serious permanent impairment. In a decision released a few days ago by Justice Morissette, the fact that the Plaintiff was able to work did not prevent her from meeting the threshold. The Judge found that the Plaintiff's perseverance at work exhausted all of her energy and thereby limited her ability to participate in her recreational and household activities. The threshold was thus met and her case was permitted to proceed. Contact Todd K. Plant, Ottawa Personal Injury & Motor Vehicle Accident Lawyer, regarding your case at 613-563-1131, Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, www.pqtlaw.com

Unlawful Confinement - Personal Injury - Damages

The Divisional Court of Ontario has upheld a lower court ruling holding the Hudson's Bay Company liable for unlawfully confining a customer who forgot to pay for a newspaper. The security guard was found to have had insufficient grounds to handcuff and hold the customer. In cases like this, the unlawful confinement may also constitute battery and assault and entitle the injured person to damages. Restraining an individual is possible by security guards in limited circumstances. However, all force used must be measured and reasonable. If the confinement is unlawful, the person detained will be entitled to monetary damages. Contact Marc-Nicholas Quinn, personal injury and accident lawyer at Plant Quinn Thiele LLP for assistance in cases such as these. 613-563-1131, www.pqtlaw.com

Affidavit of Documents - Personal Injury Action

The Rules of Civil Procedure require that all documents that have a semblance of relevance to an action be disclosed to the other side. At Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, we work with you right at the beginning to have your documents obtained and preserved for your case, should litigation be necessary. While this enables you to meet your legal responsibilities, it has the beneficial dual-purpose of having the evidence you will need to prove your case. Call Todd K. Plant at 613-563-1131 for a free consultation regarding your personal injury case. Ottawa Personal Injury & Accident Lawyers, www.pqtlaw.com

Slip and fall - trip and fall - responsible for your own fall? You can still obtain compensation - Ottawa Accident Law Firm

Regardless of the location where you fell, whether in a public place or at someone else’s private residence, if you were injured in a slip or trip and fall accident, you may be eligible to claim compensation from the owner, occupier or person responsible for the maintenance of the premises where you fell. If you are partially at fault for the accident, in most cases, you may still be entitled to compensation. In Ontario, being partially at fault still entitles injured persons to compensation.

In order to receive compensation, you must establish - with evidence - that there was some kind of negligence on the part of the owner or occupier of the property where you fell. We know what evidence you need to prove your case.

At Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, we have experience dealing with all types of injury cases. As personal injury lawyers in Ontario, we handle a large amount of slip and fall injury cases and insurers know that we deal openly, fairly and honestly with our cases and that we never give up. We settle cases every day. If settlement is not possible because of an unreasonable party, we are not afraid to commence legal action. We are as comfortable litigating as we are negotiating a settlement.

We can assist you in obtaining fair and reasonable compensation. Call Marc-Nicholas Quinn at 613-563-1131. PQTLaw, OTTAWA Injury lawyers.

Modified Objective Test for Informed Consent - Medical Malpractice

The Court of Appeal in a recent decision examined the legal test to determine whether a patient who sues her doctor had informed consent of the risks of the treatment \ surgery. The issue is whether the patient \ Plaintiff would have proceeded with the surgery had she been properly informed of the risks and whether her evidence on this point is inherently unreliable by being influenced by the hindsight knowledge of the adverse outcome. The Court of Appeal reaffirmed the modified objective test as set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Arndt v. Smith, as this would protect against the danger of a purely subjective test. As the Supreme Court said in Arndt v. Smith, a purely subjective test could serve as an incitement for a disappointed patient to bring an action. The plaintiff will invariably state with all the confidence of hindsight and with all the enthusiasm of one contemplating an award of damages that consent would never have been given if the disclosure required by an idiosyncratic belief had been made. The modified objective test would be inherently more reliable in this regard. Todd K. Plant, 613-563-1131, Ottawa Personal Injury Lawyers, Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, www.pqtlaw.com