Sabina Arulampalam
Sabina graduated as Valedictorian of her law school class, and was called to the Ontario bar in 2012.
Since her call to the bar, Sabina has worked exclusively for institutional clients with respect to risk management, statutory exposure, anti-fraud investigation, and policy/legislation interpretation.
Sabina practises civil litigation, with an emphasis on insurance defence in the areas of accident benefits and priority/loss transfer matters. She also handles a variety of civil litigation matters on behalf of insurers, including personal injury, disability claims, and property damage claims.
Sabina graduated as Valedictorian of her law school class, and was called to the Ontario bar in 2012.
Since her call to the bar, Sabina has worked exclusively for institutional clients with respect to risk management, statutory exposure, anti-fraud investigation, and policy/legislation interpretation.
Sabina practises civil litigation, with an emphasis on insurance defence in the areas of accident benefits and priority/loss transfer matters. She also handles a variety of civil litigation matters on behalf of insurers, including personal injury, disability claims, and property damage claims.
Sabina graduated as Valedictorian of her law school class, and was called to the Ontario bar in 2012.
Since her call to the bar, Sabina has worked exclusively for institutional clients with respect to risk management, statutory exposure, anti-fraud investigation, and policy/legislation interpretation.
Sabina practises civil litigation, with an emphasis on insurance defence in the areas of accident benefits and priority/loss transfer matters. She also handles a variety of civil litigation matters on behalf of insurers, including personal injury, disability claims, and property damage claims.
Sabina currently practises primarily in the firm’s Insurance Law group, and has appeared before the Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO), Superior Court of Justice, and the License Appeal Tribunal (LAT). Sabina’s reported decisions can be found on CANLII and the FSCO decisions database.
Sabina is an active member of the legal profession, having served in the Ontario Bar Association Insurance Section Executive from 2012-2018. She continues to Chair various conferences with the Ontario Bar Association, and the Canadian Defence Lawyers. In addition, she has been published by LexisNexis Canada in the Lawyer’s Daily.
Of note, Sabina competed at the International Academy of Dispute Resolution Tournament held in London, England in 2011. She was the only Canadian delegate recognized as one of the Top-10 Outstanding Mediators in the international competition.
Prior to her call to the bar, Sabina taught piano and voice lessons. Sabina has completed her classical music studies as per the requirements of the Royal Conservatory of Music in Piano (2000) as well as Voice (2001). She has also obtained an Advanced Certificate in Music History & Theory (2000).
- Appeals and Counsel Work in Complex Cases
- Bodily Injury Defence
- Coverage Opinions/Disputes
- Accident Benefits/License Appeal Tribunal (LAT)
- Loss Transfer and Priority Disputes
- Life/Disability/Health
- Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Occupiers’ Liability
- Commercial Host Liability
- Property and Commercial General Liability
- Products Liability
- Ontario Bar Association (OBA) Insurance Section Executive (2012-2018)
- Advocates' Society
- Canadian Defense Lawyers
- Toronto Lawyers' Association
- Ontario Bar Association, Co-Chair, Professional Development Program, Motor Vehicle Tort Litigation in Ontario: Critical Updates (October 2019)
- Ontario Bar Association, Co-Chair, Professional Development Program, Accident Benefits Update (May 2019)
- Lawyer’s Daily published by Lexis Nexis Canada Inc., Author, Pre-Trial Conference: Play by the Rules or Pay the Price (September 2018)
- Canadian Defence Lawyers, CDL Audioconference Program Chair – Expert Testimony Bias (April 2018)
- Ontario Bar Association, Co-Chair, Professional Development Program, Accident Benefits Update (March 2018)
- Ontario Bar Association, Co-Chair, Professional Development Program, Accident Benefits Update (March 2017)
-
Gebremarium v Intact Insurance (CV-17-579778 & CV-18-00609647-000)
Successfully argued motions for Summary Judgment wherein the Plaintiff brought two actions against his insurer relating to the payment of accident benefits in a single-vehicle accident. Plaintiff’s claims dismissed pursuant to Rule 21.01(3)(a) on the grounds that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action, given the exclusive jurisdiction of the LAT effective April 1, 2016 for matters at first instance.
-
A.A. v Unifund Assurance Company (18-008269/AABS)
Successfully defended insurer against claims made by insured for payment of medical benefits including a psychiatric evaluation, social work assessment, and a chronic pain assessment. Tribunal found that the Applicant was not removed from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) despite chronic pain, and a psychological condition.
-
E.F. v RBC Insurance Company (16-001038/AABS)
Successfully defended insurer against claims made by insured for payment of medical benefits. Tribunal found that the Applicant suffered predominantly minor injuries as defined in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS).
-
Graveline v Intact Insurance Company (FSCO A15-009166)
Successfully awarded costs against a self-represented litigant. Giving consideration to the fact that Intact was entirely successful in the arbitration and the Applicant’s conduct through same, Arbitrator found that the insurer was entitled to expenses incurred in the arbitration against a self-represented litigant in the amount of $16,700.58.
-
Graveline v Intact Insurance Company (FSCO A15-009166)
Successfully defended insurer against claims made by insured for payment of non-earner benefits. The Arbitrator found that the Applicant’s testimony about his pre-accident health was undermined by significant inconsistencies with the available documentary evidence. The lack of credibility about the Applicant’s pre-accident health was found to casts doubt on his testimony about his pre-accident activities. Apart from the Applicant’s testimony, there was no other document or contemporaneous evidence which corroborated his stated normal activities before and at the time of the accident.
Upon reviewing the case and the law the Arbitrator noted the test for entitlement for a non-earner benefit is very strict. The Arbitrator was not satisfied that the Applicant provided sufficient, persuasive and reliable evidence to establish that he is entitled to non-earner benefit and the application was dismissed.