Case Background
Anh* experienced a motor vehicle accident resulting in a traumatic brain injury. At this time, they decided that they would represent themselves at the License Appeal Tribunal (LAT) with a claim for catastrophic impairment based upon their post-accident mental behavioural impairments. Unfortunately, this resulted in Anh losing their case and being told their claim was time barred as they allegedly applied to the LAT after the limitation period, more than two years after the insurer denied the benefit. While the LAT is supposedly a place where claimants do not require counsel, the legislation is complex and having a lawyer when advancing a claim can be highly beneficial for several reasons; legal expertise, strategic guidance, document preparation and presentation, negotiation, hearing representation and appeals support.
Though Anh did not believe they had exceeded the limitation period, understandably, they were unsure how to proceed after receiving the LAT decision. It was at this point that Anh came to Campisi for help. Campisi applied for reconsideration on the client’s behalf. The LAT had the same adjudicator who originally reviewed the case evaluate the reconsideration. It is considered quite normal and an accepted practice in law to have the same adjudicator review their own decision. Not surprisingly, they maintained the LAT’s original position.
Campisi was ready for this result and quickly appealed the LAT’s decision at the Divisional Court level.
What is Divisional Court?
The Divisional Court in Ontario is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice and plays a crucial role in Ontario's judicial system by ensuring individuals have access to a fair and impartial review of decisions made by lower courts. It hears appeals from various tribunals, including decisions made by the License Appeal Tribunal (LAT). The Divisional Court does not retry cases but rather reviews decisions to determine if errors were made in law or procedure.
In Anh’s case, we argued at Divisional Court that the LAT failed to follow the legislation which sets out how to calculate the commencement of a limitation period. By successfully proving this error in calculation, Campisi was able to establish that Anh had not exceeded the limitation period on her claim after all, allowing the LAT decision to be overturned, and our client’s claim was able to continue.
If you disagree with the outcome of your claim at the LAT, you may have the right to appeal. It is important to consult with an experienced personal injury law firm, like Campisi, to advise you on the grounds for appeal and guide you in overturning an unfavourable decision or securing a more favourable outcome. Overall, having a lawyer can level the playing field and give you the best possible chance of success when advancing a claim at the LAT.
*The name of the client has been changed for confidentiality.