Paul C. Omeziri

Successfully argued that the opposing insurer was the priority insurer based on the spousal definition in the Insurance Act following a private arbitration hearing.

Successfully argued an appeal at the Financial Services Commission and obtained a finding that the Applicant did not sustain a catastrophic impairment.

Successfully defended a reconsideration request at the License Appeal Tribunal as a result of the Applicant’s failure to establish a catastrophic impairment based on the Glasgow Coma Scale.

Successfully defended an appeal in the Divisional Court in relation to a summary dismissal of a claim by a remediation contractor against an insurer based lack of privity of contract.

Successfully argued a motion in the Superior Court for summary dismissal of claim for contribution and indemnity against a home inspector as a result of the claim not being issued in two years pursuant to the Limitations Act.

Successfully defended a claim at the License Appeal Tribunal following a hearing based on the Claimant’s failure to establish entitlement to Non-Earner Benefits.

Successfully defended the appeal at the Divisional Court in relation to a dismissal of an Accident Benefits claim based on the Claimant’s lawyer’s failure to serve and file relevant documentary evidence prior to the hearing.

Successfully defended the appeal at the Divisional Court in relation to a dismissal of an Accident Benefits claim based on the Claimant’s failure to establish a causal relationship between injuries and the subject accident.

Successfully argued for the dismissal of claim for Accident Benefits at the License Appeal Tribunal under Section 55 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule as a result of the Applicants’ failure to attend medical assessments.

In Cyr v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., [2016] O.F.S.C.D. No. 162, I was successful in an appeal at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario wherein the Director’s Delegate upheld the Arbitrator’s Order that the Applicant could not file any documentary evidence or call any witnesses where notice had not been provided at least thirty (30) days in advanced of the arbitration hearing.

In Amiri v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., [2016] O.J. No. 1236, I was successful in an appeal before the Divisional Court wherein it was found that the Appellant could not appeal a decision of an Arbitrator at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario directly to the Divisional Court without first appealing to the Director’s Delegate of the Financial Services Commission.

In Dziemianko v. TD Home and Auto Insurance Co., [2015] O.F.S.C.D. No. 18, I was successful in a motion at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario dismissing the Applicant’s claims on the basis that the  Application for Arbitration was filed beyond the two-year limitation period or more than ninety (90) days after the Mediator’s Report was issued.

In Zupnik v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., [2015] O.F.S.C.D. No. 169  I was successful in an arbitration hearing wherein the Arbitrator had found that the Applicant’s post-accident business income should be considered employment income as defined under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule and should be deducted from the Applicant’s income replacement benefit. The Arbitrator had further found that the Applicant had misrepresented himself in alleging he had not worked after the accident and the Arbitrator gave no weight to the Applicant’s accountant’s expert report suggesting the business income was not deductible. As a result, the Arbitration was dismissed.

In Sasitharan v. TD General Insurance Co., [2014] O.F.S.C.D. No. 262, I represented an insurer in a hearing to determine whether an accident which occurred was staged. After hearing the evidence of the police officer, the engineering witness and several lay witnesses, the Arbitrator confirmed that there were errors on the part of both drivers, but there was insufficient evidence to prove that the Applicant had deliberately caused the accident.

In Ng v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., [2014] O.F.S.C.D. No. 99, I was successful on a motion at the Financial Services Commission of Ontario dismissing the Applicant’s claims for medical and rehabilitation benefits as being statute-barred as the Application for Arbitration was issued more than two years after the benefits were denied and more than ninety (90) days after the mediator issued the report noting the mediation had failed.

In Innvest Real Estate Investment Trust v. 1328151 Ontario Inc. [2014] 122 O.R. (3d) 590, I was successful in defending a summary judgment motion against our client. In that case, we represented a remediation contractor and we claimed coverage under the cleaning subcontractor’s insurance policy. The subcontractor’s insurer argued that our client was not insured under the subcontractor’s insurance policy as the Plaintiff’s claim against the subcontractor had been dismissed, while the Plaintiff’s claim against our client continued. The court rejected this argument and found that our client was entitled to coverage under the subcontractor’s insurance policy.

In Anand v. Rumpal, [2014] O.J. No. 5894, I was successful in defending motion for summary judgment wherein a Co-Defendant sought an Order finding our client should be liable to pay the Plaintiff’s claim. The issue was whether New York Law or Ontario Law applied. Under New York Law, our client would not be liable since he was merely renting the vehicle in which the Plaintiff was a passenger and was not driving it. Under Ontario Law, our client would be vicariously liable for the driver’s negligence as the renter of the vehicle. The court found that as the accident occurred in New York, New York Law should apply and the judge dismissed the Co-Defendant’s motion.

In Swain v. Gorman, [2014] O.J. No. 3822, I was successful in a summary judgment motion before the Ontario Superior Court wherein the court found that our client, who had been rear-ended by the Plaintiff’s vehicle, was not liable for the accident.

In Jevco Insurance Company v. State Farm Insurance Company (July 23, 2013) (Arbitrator Ken Bialkowski), I was successful in a private arbitration wherein the Arbitrator found that as the opposing insurer had failed to use standard forms approved to the Financial Services Commission of Ontario in cancelling its insurance policy, the opposing insurer would be liable to pay the Plaintiff’s accident benefits claims.