Rhona DesRoches, FAIR: 59,000 cases on docket in Ontario

Ending the use of jury trials in personal injury cases doesn’t have much to do with restricting freedom of speech for insurers who will undoubtedly continue with their fight to reduce claims costs under the guise of a fight on fraud. 

The constant maligning of MVA victims over decades by the IBC/insurers in advertising has had the intended consequence of negatively influencing the public and that has included potential jurors. This is not just one case.

In Bruff-Murphy v Gunawardena, 2016 http://canlii.ca/t/gmr5x there’s an acknowledgement that the expert evidence that the Judge found questionable may not have been viewed in the same way by the jury. Juries are made up of ordinary people with the ordinary expectation that the evidence they are presented with is honest. Anyone working in the personal injury field knows that this is often not the case when it comes to Ontario’s ‘experts’ whose medical opinions are relied on by insurers to delay and deny legitimate claims

Auto insurance is a dirty game played out in our courts and if the flawed evidence is going to be allowed in the door you can’t expect the ordinary jurors to filter out the junk medicine replete with biased or flawed opinions and come to a just decision. 

According to StatsCan there are over 59,000 (2015) auto insurance related cases on the docket in Ontario; aside from pointing out that this is indicative of an unaddressed problem with Ontario’s auto insurance, it’s a massive amount of money being laid out by taxpayers when 50% of claims are denied and end up in hearings.



Source/more:
http://www.slaw.ca/2016/10/26/wednesday-whats-hot-on-canlii-188/comment-page-1/#comment-948175