Tag Archives: Injured

Most Common Spinal Cord Injuries: Types and Causes

Written By: William Harding and Daniel Garas, Summer Student

Most Common Spinal Cord Injuries: Types and Causes

Being involved in a motor vehicle collision or an accident of another kind may result in an injury to the spinal cord. There are varying types of spinal cord injuries (SCIs) and depending on the injury, the symptoms will differ.

TYPES OF SPINAL CORD INJURIES

A) INCOMPLETE Spinal Cord Injury

These injuries are the most common of all spinal cord injuries – accounting for over 60% of SCIs.[1]

With an incomplete spinal cord injury, there still exists some degree of sensory and motor function below the site of the injury.[2] Severe chronic pain may result from these kinds of injuries.[3]

The Most Common Incomplete Injuries

Common types of incomplete spinal cord injuries

1) Anterior Cord Syndrome

Anterior Cord Syndrome results when the injury is to the front of the spinal cord. Predominately, the anterior two-thirds of the spinal cord.[4] This type of injury usually results in “motor paralysis below the level of the lesion as well as [a] loss of pain and temperature at and below the level of the lesion.”[5] Symptoms will vary depending on what portion of the spinal cord is injured.

2) Central Cord Syndrome

Central Cord Syndrome is the most common type of spinal cord injury.[6] In this case, the injury is to the center of the spinal cord. This condition leads to “motor deficits that are worse in the upper extremities as compared to the lower extremities. It may also cause bladder dysfunction (retention) and variable sensory deficits below the level of injury.”[7] Recovery of some movement in the legs is possible; recovery of movement in the arms is rare.[8]

3) Brown-Sequard Syndrome

Brown-Sequard Syndrome is when the injury is on one side of the spinal cord – either the left or right side. The side of the body where the injury is located is affected the most. Symptoms of this injury include:  “weakness or paralysis and proprioceptive deficits on the side of the body ipsilateral [same side] to the lesion and loss of pain and temperature sensation on the contralateral [opposite] side.”[9]

Other Incomplete Injuries

Other incomplete injuries include Cauda Equina Syndrome, Conus Medullaris Syndrome, and Posterior Cord Syndrome.

Cauda Equina Syndrome results when there is damage to the “bundle of nerve roots around the lumbar level of the spinal cord.”[10] The cause of CES is spinal compression. This injury weakens the affected muscles and creates a loss of sensation, but the movement is not necessarily affected.[11]

Conus Medullaris Syndrome affects the sacral cord and lumbar nerve roots. CMS has similar symptoms to CES.[12]

Posterior Cord Syndrome results from damage to the back of the spinal cord and causes poor coordination skills.[13]

B) COMPLETE Spinal Cord Injury

A complete spinal cord injury results when the spinal cord is fully compressed or severed and results in complete bilateral paralysis below the injured site. Bilateral means that both sides of the body are affected equally. In other words, sensory and motor function is completely lost below the point of the injury.

Common types of complete spinal cord injuries.

1) Quadriplegia (Tetraplegia)

Quadriplegia is paralysis that affects all four limbs: both of the arms and both of the legs. The lesion is in the cervical spinal cord[14] and as with any spinal cord injury, the location of the injury on the cervical spine will determine the severity of the paralysis.

2) Paraplegia

A paraplegic loses all sensory and motor functions in their legs and generally the pelvis, but not in their arms. The lesion is usually located in the thoracic or lumbar portions of the spinal cord.[15] Those that are paraplegic are generally more independent as a result.

CAUSES OF SPINAL CORD INJURIES

Spinal cord injuries result from damage to the vertebrae or discs, which causes compression on the spinal cord or damage to the spinal cord directly. This can result from a traumatic blow to a person’s spine.

Studies show that the most common causes for spinal cord injuries are the following: motor vehicle accidents, falls, acts of violence, and sports and recreation.[16]

HAVE YOU SUFFERED A SPINAL CORD INJURY?

If you or a loved one has suffered a spinal cord injury as a result of the negligence of another person, please contact one of the personal injury lawyers at McLeish Orlando LLP for a free consultation.

 

[1] Types of Spine Injuries, Sonoran Spine, December 27, 2016, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.sonoranspine.com/blog/item/types-of-spine-injuries.

[2] What is an SCI, Spinal Cord Injury Ontario, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://sciontario.org/support-services/info-insights/living-with-an-sci/what-is-an-sci/.

[3] Complete vs Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: What You Need to Know, SpinalCord.com, February 11, 2020, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.spinalcord.com/blog/complete-vs.-incomplete-spinal-cord-injuries [Complete v Incomplete SCI].

[4] Anterior Cord Syndrome, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Updated on August 10, 2020, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559117/.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Central Cord Syndrome, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Updated on March 6, 2021, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK441932/.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Complete v Incomplete SCI, supra note 3.

[9] Brown Sequard Syndrome, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Updated on September 14, 2020, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK538135/.

[10] Complete v Incomplete SCI, supra note 3.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Tetraplegia, National Center for Biotechnology Information, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gtr/conditions/C0034372/.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Spinal Cord Injury, Mayo Clinic, Accessed on July 7, 2021, https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/spinal-cord-injury/symptoms-causes/syc-20377890; Complete v Incomplete SCI, supra note 3.

What is Catastrophic Impairment?

Written By: Dale Orlando and Emma Pedota, Summer Student

Catastrophic Injury Lawyers

No-fault auto insurance benefits in Ontario are set out in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (“SABS”) which creates three categories of injuries that determine how much money will be available to an individual after being injured in an auto incident. The first category is the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG). An individual will be classified under MIG if they experience whiplash-related injuries, muscular strains/sprains, contusions, and/or lacerations.[1] Individuals who fall under MIG are entitled to $3,500 for their medical-rehabilitation needs.

An individual who does not fall into the MIG will be classified as non-catastrophic (non-CAT) which typically provides up to $65,000 of medical-rehabilitation and attendant care funding, for up to five years.

If an individual has sustained more serious injuries than those outlined under the MIG and non-CAT designation, they may meet the description of catastrophic impairment (CAT). To be found catastrophically impaired, an individual must meet one of the several criteria set out in the legislation. When classified as such by your insurer, the injured person has access to one million dollars over their lifetime for medical benefits, rehabilitation benefits, and attendant care benefits.

The SABS defines catastrophic impairment as one of the following:

  • Paraplegia or tetraplegia
  • Traumatic brain injury
  • Blindness or a loss of vision of both eyes
  • Amputation or severe impairment of the ability to move or use one arm or to walk independently
  • Physical impairment or a combination of physical impairment that results in 55 percent whole person impairment
  • Severe mental/behavioral disorder in three or more areas of function

It is important to note that the designation of a catastrophic injury is different for children than for adults with regard to brain injuries. This is because a brain injury in children may not be immediately apparent. For other injuries, including spinal injuries, blindness, loss of limbs, etc., children are evaluated for a catastrophic injury in the same way as adults.

Causes of Catastrophic Injuries

Catastrophic injuries can be caused by a variety of factors. Some of the most common causes of catastrophic injuries are:

Changes in Ontario Law

Recent changes to Ontario law have made it more difficult for individuals to recover compensation after suffering a catastrophic injury. For example, the previous regime allowed victims to receive up to $1 million in medical and rehabilitation benefits and up to $1 million in attendant care benefits. The current regime has reduced these benefits to allows individuals to receive up to $1 million for medical, rehabilitation, and attendant care benefits.

Tort Action Against a Negligent Party

In addition to receiving benefits from your own insurer, an individual who has been seriously injured as a result of a motor vehicle incident is entitled to sue the negligent party for damages. The tort system is designed to put the innocent injured party in the financial position that he or she would have been if the injury had not occurred. Some of the heads of damages in a tort action include:

  • Loss of past income
  • Loss of future income
  • Cost of attendant care and future care
  • Housekeeping and home maintenance
  • Special damages
  • General damages for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life

In Ontario, there are caps on damage awards that may limit a catastrophically impaired individual’s recovery. For example, there is a limit on damages for pain and suffering, which is capped at about $370,000 as of 2020, subject to inflation each year. However, damages for income loss and future cost of care do not have a cap.

If you or a loved one have been catastrophically injured, or if your pursuit of catastrophic designation has been denied by your insurer, call McLeish Orlando for a free consultation.

 

[1] Najma Rashid, What is Catastrophic Impairment, online: Ontario Trial Lawyers Association Blog < https://otlablog.com/what-is-a-catastrophic-impairment/>.

What to do After a Car Collision in Ontario

Written By: Nick Todorovic and Emma Pedota, Summer Student

What to do After a Car Collision in Ontario

So, you have been in a car collision. Now what? Here is how to achieve the best possible outcome in a less than favorable situation.

Immediate Aftermath

As difficult as it may seem, remain calm. If you or any other passengers are injured, call 911 and wait for emergency responders to arrive. Describe all injuries and symptoms to the paramedics at the scene. In the event that you have lost consciousness or memory, or are unsure if you did, inform the paramedics as soon as possible so they are aware of any possible sustained head injuries. It is crucial not to withhold details of your symptoms or injuries to the paramedics attending the scene to ensure that you are being treated accordingly and there is an adequate record of your initial symptoms, should you choose to bring forward a personal injury claim.

Do not voluntarily assume liability or take responsibility, sign statements regarding fault, or promise to pay for damage at the scene of the collision. Save your recollection of the events for the police and avoid talking to anyone about the details of the collision.

If and when it is safe to do so, take pictures/videos of the scene and the damage to the vehicles. Provide the other driver(s) with your vehicle registration number, license information, your name, address, and insurance details. You will want to collect the same information along with the make, model, and license plate numbers of all other vehicles involved. Record as much information as possible about the collision and those involved, including the contact information of any witnesses.

Next Steps

Make inquiries into any dash cams or surveillance videos that may have recorded the collision. If you were a cyclist involved in a motor vehicle collision, get a repair estimate of your bike from a repair shop. Should you chose to bring forward an insurance claim and your insurance company approves the estimate, you may have your bike repaired at the repair shop of your choice.

Report all symptoms or injuries to any treatment provider as soon as possible and on an ongoing basis. If you require ongoing treatment or cannot work, contact your insurance company and open an accident benefits claim. If you are not personally insured, open an accident benefits claim with the insurer of the other driver(s) involved in the collision.

It is highly recommended that you speak to a personal injury lawyer as soon as possible after the collision. By consulting a lawyer early in the process, you will get the help you need in navigating the complexities of motor vehicle collisions. You will also have better access to the legal resources you need to get compensated for the injuries and damages you or your loved ones have suffered. Contact the lawyers at McLeish Orlando for a free consultation or visit our website.

To learn more about common mistakes to avoid after an auto collision, click here.

New Watermark for Loss of Care, Guidance, and Companionship Damages: Moore vs 7595611

Written By: Patrick Brown and Daniel Garas, Summer Student

In the recent decision of Moore v 7595611[1], the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld an award of $250,000 for loss of care, guidance, and companionship – a new watermark for damages of this kind.

PREVIOUS WATERMARK

The previous high-end for this head of damages was $100,000, established in To v. Toronto (City) Board of Education.[2] This 2001 decision involved a student that was killed during his physical education class when the handball net, on which he was doing pull-ups, fell on his head.[3] Under loss of care, guidance, and companionship, the parents were each awarded $100,000 – an award that would not be interfered with by the Ontario Court of Appeal.[4]

NEW WATERMARK

In the decision released on June 25, 2021, a unanimous Court dismissed the appeal by the numbered company. The Appellant, among other issues raised, challenged the jury award for loss of care, guidance, and companionship ($250,000 to each Plaintiff).

This case arose when the Plaintiffs’ daughter, as tenant, suffered serious injuries which she sustained during a house fire.[5] She was trapped, with no way of escape, and later died at Sunnybrook Hospital. [6] The Plaintiffs decided to commence an action against the Defendants for their negligent conduct.

The numbered company cited To v. Toronto (City) Board of Education, for the proposition that the award of $250,000 was too high.[7] The Appellants specifically quote paragraph 37 of the To decision, where the Court held that the $100,000 award represented the “high end of an accepted range of guidance, care, and companionship damages.”[8]

Despite this, the Court held that the threshold for interfering with a jury award is “extremely high”[9] and in the present case, agreed with the Plaintiffs’ that it should not interfere because the high standard had not been met.[10] The Court further noted that the decision in To stated that “each case must be given separate consideration.”[11]

The Court of Appeal states that ultimately “there is no neat mathematical formula that can be applied to determine the correct amount” when calculating this type of damages.[12]

In summary, Justice Fairburn writes that “while there is no question that the jury award for loss of care, guidance, and companionship, in this case, is high, in light of the factual backdrop of this case, it does not constitute an amount that ‘shocks the conscience of the court’…Nor does it represent an amount that is ‘so inordinately high’ that it is ‘wholly erroneous’ in nature.”[13] (Emphasis is my own)

WHAT THIS ALSO MEANS

Even though this case deals with the loss of a daughter, the amount and decision by the court of appeal should impact all awards relating to loss of care, guidance, and companionship (including loss of spouse, parent, grandparent) as well as adjusting the ranges given by judges at trial.

INJURED?

If you or a loved one has been injured, please contact the lawyers at McLeish Orlando LLP for a free consultation.

 

[1] Moore v. 7595611 Canada Corp., 2021 ONCA 459 [Moore].

[2] To v. Toronto (City) Board of Education, 150 O.A.C. 54, 204 D.L.R. (4th) 704 [Toronto Board].

[3] Ibid at para 3.

[4] Ibid at para 31.

[5] Moore, supra note 1 at para 1.

[6] Ibid at paras 2 and 3.

[7] Ibid at para 22.

[8] Ibid; Toronto Board, supra note 2 at para 37.

[9] Moore, supra note 1 at para 24.

[10] Ibid at para 26.

[11] Ibid at para 27; Toronto Board, supra note 2 at para 29.

[12] Moore, supra note 1 at para 27.

[13] Ibid at para 30.

How to Prevent Traumatic Brain Injuries in Sports

Written By: Lindsay Charles and Cody Malloy, Summer Student

How to Prevent Traumatic Brain Injuries in Sports

Let the kids play, as they say, but put safety first.  The risk of brain injuries in sports is very real.  The following statistics published by the Government of Canada illustrate the realities of brain injuries in youth sports in Canada:

  • For children and youth ages 5-19, brain injuries from this age group were about 80% of emergency department visits out of all head injuries from sports and recreation
  • For boys, brain injuries were most common in hockey for ages 10-14 and rugby for ages 15-19
  • For girls, brain injuries were most common in ringette for ages 10-19

According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information, concussions from hockey almost double the concussions from each of cycling, football/rugby, and ski/snowboard.  The Government of Ontario reports that concussions are the most common form of head injury in Ontario.

The Ontario government has taken action to reduce concussions in athletes moving forward.  In 2013, Rowan Stringer, a high school rugby player from Ottawa, passed away from Second Impact Syndrome as a result of suffering multiple concussions in a short period of time.  In response, the Ontario legislature unanimously passed Rowan’s Law in 2016, which put the recommendations from a coroner’s inquest into her death into action.  The objective of the bill was to prevent a similar tragedy from happening in the future.  Rowan’s Law makes it mandatory for sports organizations to adhere to the guidelines set out by Ontario’s Concussion Awareness Resources with regards to removal from sport and return to play.

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a less common brain injury from sports, is a degenerative brain condition caused by repeated blows to the head.  Athletes that play high-impact sports, such as hockey, football, and rugby, are especially susceptible to CTE.  According to the Cleveland Clinic, CTE causes changes in a person’s thinking, personality, mood, and behavior.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has a comprehensive page breaking down the brain injury risks in a variety of sports.  As an athlete or a parent of an athlete, it’s important how to prevent you or your child from suffering from a traumatic brain injury in sports.

Wear the proper safety equipment

Sports such as baseball, field hockey, skiing, hockey, lacrosse, softball, wrestling, and cycling all require the use of a helmet.  Athletes need to ensure is that their helmet fits properly.  For example, a batting helmet in baseball that is too big can shift, causing part of the forehead to be exposed.  If a ball strikes you, or your child, while your helmet rises up above your forehead, you risk suffering a serious brain injury from the impact of the ball.  Hockey helmets that are sold in Canada must meet the safety standards set out by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA).  Check out this informative webpage from the Government of Canada regarding wearing the proper safety gear in sporting activities.

Mouthguards are another form of athletic safety equipment.  Not only do mouthguards protect against dental damage, but they also protect against brain injuries.  According to the Government of Canada, in most cases when an athlete suffers a blow to the head, the force of their teeth biting together redistributes the force to the soft tissue in the brain.  A properly fitted mouthguard prevents an athlete’s teeth from biting together after an impact to the head, cushioning the blow, and reducing the exposure to a traumatic brain injury.

Also consider that non-contact sports, such as basketball and volleyball, where athletes don’t wear safety equipment, also present risks for athletes to suffer brain injuries.  Collisions between multiple players are common in basketball.  In volleyball, players at times have to dive.  Both instances open athletes to serious brain injuries.  As a result, some basketball players choose to wear mouthguards to reduce their exposure to brain injuries.  Volleyball players should be taught how to properly dive to ensure their safety.  It’s important to remember that just because you don’t wear a helmet, it doesn’t mean you’re playing a sport immune from brain injuries.

Practice safe play

Although safety equipment can prevent serious injury in sport, it’s still important to play safely, even in contact sports.  Hockey Canada urges coaches to instruct players on the dangers of hitting from behind.  In basketball, players should not strike other players on the head in an attempt to take the ball off the opposing player.  In football, helmet-on-helmet collisions should be avoided at all times.  In baseball, intentionally throwing a ball at another player’s head is extremely dangerous.  Safety equipment can reduce injury, but there’s no excuse for reckless behaviour in sport that subjects others to unnecessary bodily harm.

Be aware of the signs of a brain injury

According to the CDC, a blow to the head “causes the head and brain to move rapidly back and forth. This sudden movement can cause the brain to bounce around or twist in the skull, creating chemical changes in the brain and sometimes stretching and damaging brain cells.”

It’s very important to be aware of the signs of a brain injury.  By recognizing the existence of a possible brain injury, you prevent yourself or your child from worsening the injury.  The CDC outlines the following as examples of concussion symptoms:

  • Concussion symptoms observed by a bystander of the injured person:
    • Dazed or stunned
    • Forgetful when engaged in conversation
    • Clumsy movements
    • Speaks slowly
  • Concussion symptoms reported by the injured person:
    • Headache
    • Nausea
    • Dizziness
    • Irritation to light or noise
    • Confusion

Concussion symptoms can be present right away, but sometimes they take days to set in.  If any of these symptoms are present and worsen over a few hours or days, take yourself or your child to see a doctor right away.  By getting the proper treatment early, you can prevent the brain injury from worsening.

Proper return to play

After recovering from a brain injury, it’s imperative that you or your child eases back into playing.  By rushing back into playing, you or your child’s brain injury can worsen, potentially leading to serious health issues down the road.

The CDC published a six-step plan for return to play, including getting cleared to return from a doctor:

  • Back to regular non-sporting activities (school, work)
  • Light aerobic activity
  • Moderate activity
  • Heavy, non-contact activity
  • Practice and full contact
  • Full competition

By safely returning to play, you or your child can get back to playing your favorite sports!

Although brain injuries from sports are usually an accident, sometimes it’s due to the negligence of others.  If you or your child has suffered a sports or recreation injury due to someone else’s negligence, McLeish Orlando is here to help.  Do not hesitate to contact the lawyers at McLeish Orlando for a free consultation.  One of our lawyers will evaluate your child’s case.

Collisions at Intersections

Written By: Lindsay Charles and Sonam Sapra, Summer Student

Collisions at Intersections

In Canada, about 30% of traffic fatalities and 40% of serious personal injuries occur at intersections. These alarming statistics clearly illustrate why intersections are regarded as one of the most dangerous locations on a roadway.

Why are Intersections Dangerous?

In Ontario, there are two main types of intersections: controlled and uncontrolled. Controlled intersections generally have traffic lights, yield signs or stop signs that work to control traffic. Controlled intersections are usually found in urban areas. On the other hand, uncontrolled intersections do not have signs or traffic lights and are usually found in areas where there is no traffic, such as rural areas. While different, both types of intersections are equally as dangerous.

Controlled intersections are considered dangerous locations on the roadway because they are high conflict zones. More specifically, controlled intersections usually have multiple roads that cross over each other, right-turning lanes, left-turning lanes, bicycle lanes, and pedestrians in the same area – all of which give rise to the possibility of conflicts that can result in collisions. Uncontrolled intersections might be less busy than controlled intersections as they are located in more rural areas, however, at these intersections, collisions occur at high speeds making them particularly severe.

There are four main types of collisions that occur at an intersection: side-impact collisions, also known as T-bone collisions, head-on collisions, left-turn collisions, and rear-end collisions. Further, at intersections, both cyclists and pedestrians can be struck by motor vehicles. Side-impact, or T-Bone, and head-on collisions can have very serious consequences and often result in fatalities, especially when the vehicles involved are traveling at high speeds.

With the high rate of collisions occurring at intersections, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), run by the United States Department of Transportation sought to identify the leading causes of intersections collisions by conducting an on-scene study.

The Leading Cause of Intersection Collisions

The study by the NHTSA identified six critical driver-attributed causes of intersection crashes. The NHTSA observed 756,570 intersection-related collisions and concluded that inadequate surveillance by drivers was the leading cause of intersection collisions, accounting for 44.1% of the crashes. The remaining causes identified by the study include: the false assumption of the other’s actions, turned with an obstructed view, illegal maneuver, internal distraction, and finally, misjudgment of gap or other’s speed.

How We Can Help

Ultimately, collisions at intersections can result in serious personal injuries, and determining who is at fault can be a complicated and arduous process. The lawyers at McLeish Orlando can help navigate the process and alleviate the stress that arises from such a collision.

Please contact the lawyers at McLeish Orlando for more information and to schedule a free assessment of your case.

10 Common Summer Time Accidents for Kids and How to Avoid Them

Written By: Patrick Brown and Cody Malloy, Summer Student

10 Common Summer Time Accidents for Kids and How to Avoid Them

Summer is officially here, and no one is more excited about the hot weather than our energetic children.  After months of being constantly stuck at home due to schools being closed due to COVID-19, children are finally ready to get outside and have some fun.

The number one thing we can all do to ensure our children are safe is to ensure we drive slowly and cautiously in our communities.  As well, we should also consider avoiding the use of the car for short distances in areas where children play.

Children are unpredictable at times and heightened awareness by adults is key to their safety.  As well, we should also consider some other tips that may help.

1) Biking

Although kids will be quick to whip out their bicycles, it’s important to first take the proper safety measures.  Under the law, children must wear a properly fitted and approved bicycle helmet.

Most local bylaws permit younger children to ride on the sidewalk. Again, the number one preventative measure to protect our children on bikes is to drive slowly and safely.

When driving in areas where children are, ensure that you will be able to stop your vehicle quickly.  Always be watching for children playing to ensure that if they make an unexpected move, you are ready to react.

All drivers must give at least one meter when passing cyclists.  Where young people are riding, slow down and proceed around the cyclist when you can ensure you can do it safely.  Otherwise, be patient and wait.

One of the greatest dangers to children is drivers who are distracted and look at their phones.  This is leading to drivers leaving the roadway and potentially striking children as they play.  Using your phone and other forms of distraction inside a car puts children at high risk.

Contact between a car and a child even at slow speeds has tragic consequences.  Always make sure before you reverse in your neighborhood to be hyper-vigilant for children on sidewalks, behind the car, or on the road.

By putting safety first, kids can enjoy their summer ride in the sun.

2) Playing on the street

Whether it’s hide and seek, road hockey, skateboarding, or any other fun activity, kids love to play on the street with their neighbourhood friends.  Unfortunately, an inattentive motorist can come by at any time and put your kids at risk.  Pedestrian accidents involving children playing outside are a very real danger.

It is important that all communities monitor the road activity in their neighbourhoods and educate small children about the risks associated with drivers.  If drivers are driving at high rates of speed in your neighbourhood, contact your local councillors and road authorities to try to have measures implemented to reduce speed.  These can include speed reduction, bulb-outs, speed bumps, road diets, signage, etc.  A comprehensive list of recommendations local authorities can employ are listed in the Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario Pedestrian Death Review.

3) Swimming

Whether it’s at a pool or a beach, children love swimming and all of the fun games that go along with it.  However, fun in the water comes with a very serious safety hazard.  The danger of children drowning is very real.

Swimming children should be supervised by an adult at all times.  If your child is swimming at a municipal pool or local beach, see if there’s a lifeguard on duty.

As swimmers ourselves, we can do our part to look out for the well-being of all children.  If you are swimming in a pool or local lake, take notice of children playing in the water nearby.  Be on the lookout for any child that may appear to be struggling to keep themselves afloat.

On average, about 400 people die from drowning every year in Canada.  By taking swimming safety seriously, we can lower this heartbreaking statistic.  If you see a child in distress in the water, immediately call 911.

4) Boating

On a nice cottage weekend, sometimes there’s nothing more fun than taking the family out on the boat to check out the local lake.  Unfortunately, boating accidents involving children are quite common during Ontario summer months.

Like driving, drinking and boating do not mix and can have deadly consequences to children and others on the lake.  If you and your family believe that this is an issue in the areas where you boat or swim, you can notify the local authorities of your concern.

If you want to tow the kids on a tube, ensure you have a spotter on the lookout for other watercraft and any fallen tubers.  Properly fitted lifejackets for children are a must to ensure the kids have a fun and safe cottage weekend on the water.

Always be on the lookout for children playing in the water.  If you’re driving your boat near a designated swimming area, be sure to slow down and watch out for any children.  Children may be too busy playing to notice nearby boats, so we must all do our part to put the safety of children first when driving close to shore.

See: boating safety tips from the Canadian Red Cross

5) Sports

Although the road to organized sports, such as baseball and soccer, still remains unclear as Ontario continues to reopen from social distancing restrictions, kids are sure to play unorganized sports for fun with their friends at local parks.

Always make sure that your kids are wearing the proper footwear and have the proper safety equipment for the sport.  Playing soccer in flip flops is most certainly going to result in a rolled ankle, or worse.

If your child is playing baseball, ensure they wear a properly fitted batting helmet to avoid serious brain injuries.  Concussions are a major risk in children’s sports.  If your child is injured and reports any concussion-related symptoms, take your child to a doctor.

If you’re throwing a ball around amongst your friends with children playing nearby, be sure to be vigilant in looking out for unsuspecting children that may wander close to you.  Whether it’s an errant throw or chasing down a ball in the air, the last thing anyone wants is a collision with a child.  By being aware of our surroundings, we can ensure fun at the park for all ages.

6) Left alone in a car

Leaving young children alone in a hot car is a very serious risk to your child’s health.  Despite the obvious risk, on average, one child in Canada dies from heatstroke in a hot car every year.

Never leave your children in a car alone.  If you can’t bring your child with you, arrange for daycare for your child.  A child’s life can be in danger even only after a few minutes inside a hot car.  No, cracking the window isn’t a good alternative either.

Surprisingly, most incidents related to children left unattended in hot cars are accidental.  As crazy as this may sound, always check the backseat when getting out of your car.  If you see a child in distress alone in a car during the summer months, call 911.

7) Playground climbing

Although playgrounds were previously closed by the provincial government, the summer is the perfect time for kids to utilize municipal playgrounds.  However, children should avoid climbing on areas that aren’t meant to be reached.  A supervising adult should ensure children aren’t trying to climb on anything that’s unsafe.  Games such as “Grounders”, which is an alternate game of “tag” where one person has their eyes closed, are extremely dangerous and should be avoided.

If you’re supervising your child at a playground, ensure they’re using the equipment in the way it’s designed to be used.  No one wants to take their child to the hospital for a broken arm after an unnecessary fall.

If you notice faulty or damaged playground equipment, be sure to contact your local municipality to get it repaired.  Whether it’s a broken chain on a swing or a sharp edge on a ladder, these issues should be brought to your municipality’s attention as soon as possible to avoid children getting injured.

8) Trampoline

Backyard trampolines are certainly a popular activity for children in the summer.  However, if used improperly, they are extremely dangerous for children.  Improper use of a trampoline can result in serious brain or spinal cord injuries, resulting in permanent disfigurement of the child.  Trampolines should be used under adult supervision, and stunts such as flips should not be attempted by children that have not had proper training.

9) Hiking

Ontario thankfully has a vast array of hiking trails for families to explore this summer.  Hiking is a great way to see the beautiful landscape of Ontario while getting physical exercise.

However, children are at risk of many hiking injuries and exercising safety while hiking is very important.  If you’re on a trail near a family, be sure to give children extra space.  Children may unexpectedly stop on a trail, resulting in a collision with another hiker.

If you’re taking your child out on a hike, make sure they’re wearing the proper footwear.  If any cliffs are nearby, ensure your child doesn’t wander too far from the edge.

Also ensure children take the proper measures to prevent against bug bites, such as wearing long clothing and using bug spray, if you’re hiking in an area with ticks.  Lyme disease has recently become a growing concern in Ontario.  When you get back from a hike, you should change your clothes and check your child for ticks and any potential tick bites.

Always consider your child’s safety when venturing into the bug-filled woods in Ontario during the summer.

10) Sunburn

Last but not least, an overarching concern that applies to almost all summertime activities is too much exposure to our friendly, but no so friendly neighbour, the sun.  Ensure your child is wearing sunscreen with the appropriate SPF level.  Sunscreen with an SPF of at least 30 is recommended for children.  Make sure your kids stay properly hydrated and be aware of the symptoms of heatstroke.

Summer can be the most fun time of the year for families to spend time together, but sometimes there are others who don’t take the necessary precautions.

If your child suffered an injury due to someone else’s negligence, McLeish Orlando is here to help.  Do not hesitate to contact us for a free consultation.  One of our lawyers will evaluate your child’s case.

Overcoming the Municipal Limitation Period: Graham v. City of Toronto

Written By: Dale Orlando and Cody Malloy, Summer Student

Overcoming the Municipal Limitation Period:  Graham v. City of Toronto

Municipalities owe a duty of care to individuals to protect them against bodily harm and property damage.  Municipalities have to protect people and their property from a variety of hazards, such as potholes, tree or branch damage, floods, and various other types of hazards.

One of the most common claims against a municipality is negligent road repair.  The drastic change in temperate from cold winters to hot summers creates no shortage of potholes on Toronto roadways.

If I’m a victim of the City of Toronto’s negligent road repair, what’s my next step?  According to the City of Toronto Act section 42(6), in order to advance a claim against the City of Toronto for damages arising out of their negligent road repair, written notice must be given to the city clerk within ten days of the incident.  Failure to provide written notice is a complete bar to bringing an action unless the injured party dies or has a reasonable excuse for not providing notice and the City is not prejudiced in their defence by the failure to provide notice within the specified time.

The recent Superior Court of Ontario decision Graham v. City of Toronto, 2021 ONSC 2278 examines the exceptions to the mandatory 10 day notice period where.  Papageorgiou J. held that a plaintiff was able to file a claim against the City despite filing more than three months after the limitation period had expired. [1]  In Graham, the plaintiff suffered injuries after tripping on a large, deep pothole on a pedestrian crosswalk on January 2, 2018.  The plaintiff did not give the City notice of her claim until March 22, 2018.  The City filed a motion to dismiss the claim since the plaintiff failed to give proper notice under section 42(6) of the City of Toronto Act.

Plaintiff’s reasonable excuse for delay

Papageorgiou J. recognized different factors relevant to a plaintiff’s reasonable excuse, such as the seriousness of the injury and any treatment associated with it, whether the plaintiff was capable of forming the intention to sue the municipality, the length of the delay, and the explanation for the delay. [2]

The plaintiff’s explanation for her delay was given in her affidavit, which stated that she had “never been injured before, was dealing with work and treating my injuries, and had never dealt with anything like this before. I was also unaware of the ten-day notice period and remained undecided as to whether I wanted to make a claim until I realized that my injuries were not resolving.” [3]

Additionally, the plaintiff’s family doctor thought she would get better with physiotherapy, but after a couple of months, the plaintiff realized her injuries were more severe than her family doctor thought. [4] Papageorgiou J. also noted that it took time for the plaintiff to realize her injuries would affect her lifestyle in the form of being unable to ski or golf. [5]

Papageorgiou J. ultimately found the plaintiff’s excuse to be reasonable because she demonstrated that her uncertainty with regards to suing the City stemmed from waiting to see if her injuries would heal. [6]

Prejudice to the City

To overcome this prong of the test, the onus is on the plaintiff to show the City was not prejudiced by the delay. [7] Evidence that is relevant for the plaintiff might include the City investigating the scene despite no notice, the plaintiff taking timely photographs of the scene, and the plaintiff obtaining witness information from the scene of the incident. [8]

In Graham, the plaintiff produced evidence such as retaining a forensic engineer who measured the pothole dimensions from the photographs taken by the plaintiff and the City fixing the pothole shortly after her incident due to an unrelated complaint about the size of the pothole. [9] Additionally, the plaintiff’s three-month delay in providing notice was relatively short in comparison to previous cases that had been permitted to proceed despite significantly longer delays in giving notice.  For these reasons, Papageorgiou J. held that the City was not prejudiced by the plaintiff’s claim.

Ultimately, Graham is a great illustration of the exception to the ten-day notice requirement in the City of Toronto Act.  The Superior Court of Ontario has reaffirmed that victims of municipal non-repair are not strictly held to the notice requirement.

If you are a victim of an injury from a pothole or any other form of municipal non-repair, McLeish Orlando is here to help.  Please contact us for a free consultation, and one of our lawyers will evaluate your claim.

 

[1] Graham v. City of Toronto, 2021 ONSC 2278 at para 48.

[2] Ibid at para 18.

[3] Ibid at para 20.

[4] Ibid at para 22.

[5] Ibid at para 23.

[6] Ibid at paras 34.

[7] Ibid at para 38.

[8] Ibid at para 39.

[9] Ibid at para 43.

[10] Ibid at paras 35 and 44.

Escaping the MIG with Chronic Pain

Written By: Lindsay Charles and Brandon Pedersen, Student-at-Law

Escaping the MIG with Chronic Pain

Is a formal diagnosis of ‘chronic pain’ necessary to escape the Minor Injury Guideline (“MIG”)? A recent LAT decision suggests no, provided there is medical evidence documenting persistent pain for greater than 3 to 6 months.

In C.G. v The Guarantee Company of North America, 2020 CanLII 40333 (ON LAT), the applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident in 2004 and then a subsequent accident in 2009. She suffered physical and psychological injuries as a result of these previous accidents and was deemed catastrophically impaired as a result of the 2004 accident.

The applicant was in a third automobile accident on February 20, 2015, when she was a passenger in a vehicle that was rear-ended. She sustained injuries to her back and right elbow and suffered post-accident headaches, as well as an exacerbation to her pre-existing injuries. As a result, she sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The applicant applied for medical benefits and was denied by the insurer because she was placed into the MIG. The applicant disagreed with the insurer’s decision and submitted an application to the LAT for dispute resolution.

MIG Determination

A minor injury, for the purposes of the MIG, means a sprain, strain, whiplash associated disorder, contusion, abrasion, laceration or subluxation, and any clinically associated sequelae. Someone with minor injuries only has access to a maximum of $3,500 for medical and rehabilitation benefits, whereas someone with more severe injuries has access to up to $50,000 in benefits.

Adjudicator Johal agreed with the reconsideration decisions in T.S. and Aviva Insurance Canada, 2018 CanLII 83520 (ON LAT) and the decision in P.L. and Aviva Insurance Canada, 2019 CanLII 22223 (ON LAT), which found that chronic pain is not a minor injury and does not fall within the definition of the MIG. In P.L. and Aviva, Vice-Chair Trojek stated the following:

[12] I find that an actual diagnosis of CPS [chronic pain syndrome] is not required to remove an applicant from the MIG.  My finding is based on the reconsideration decision of Executive Chair, Linda Lamoureux, in T.S. v. Aviva General Insurance Company.  The Executive Chair in that decision found that chronic pain is by definition a condition that persists for three to six months, and that a diagnosis of CPS is not required to remove an applicant from the MIG.

In C.G., the clinical notes and records of the applicant’s family doctor showed a diagnosis of a right elbow contusion and back strain following the 2015 accident, and referenced ongoing right elbow pain for more than two and half years post-accident. However, the applicant never received a formal diagnosis of chronic pain. The insurer’s position was that the lack of a formal diagnosis should prevent the applicant from escaping the MIG.

Adjudicator Johal stated that “Chronic pain is a condition that persists for three to six months and a formal diagnosis of chronic pain is not required to remove an applicant from the MIG.” Adjudicator Johal found that the applicant escaped the MIG due to her chronic pain:

[34] In my view, the medical evidence establishes that she suffers from chronic pain.  She has visited her family doctor and other medical practitioners with respect to her elbow pain as discussed above repeatedly since the subject accident.  Furthermore, the applicant’s treating physician, Dr.  Hadcock, notes in an OCF-3 dated November 5, 2017, which is more than two and a half years post-accident that the anticipated duration of pain will be more than 12 weeks “due to severity of injuries (sic) & current chronicity, poor prognosis for return to significant activities.

The applicant was found to be outside the definition of the MIG and entitled to treatment beyond the monetary limits of $3,500.

10 Common Mistakes to Avoid After a Car Accident | McLeish Orlando

10 Common Mistakes to Avoid After a Car Accident

Written By: William Harding and Ryan Marinacci, Student-at-Law

10 Common Mistakes to Avoid After a Car Accident | McLeish Orlando

Car accidents regularly have devastating consequences on the lives of those involved.  Significant injuries coupled with navigating the complexities of the legal system in order to seek redress can be stressful and onerous.  Here are 10 common mistakes to avoid after a car accident.

  1. Do not leave the scene of the collision. Failing to stop at the scene of a collision is an offence under s. 320.16 of the Criminal Code punishable by a term of imprisonment.  In addition to attracting criminal sanction, fleeing the scene can also have legal consequences in the civil context by hampering the investigation into the circumstances of the collision.
  2. Do not forget to call 9-11. Recordings of 9-11 phone calls often provide important details regarding the immediate reactions and impressions of individuals involved in a collision.  Those early reactions and impressions can be lost without the contemporaneous recordings offered by calling 9-11 from the scene.
  3. Do not move your vehicle unless doing so is necessary for safety reasons. The post-collision resting positions of vehicles can be key to determining the mechanics of a collision and how fault might be apportioned between the drivers, especially in the event of a serious collision.  Moving the vehicles can prevent investigating officers from making these important determinations.
  4. Do not leave the scene without the other driver’s information. Do not negotiate.  Demand the insurance slip and driver’s licence of the other driver and note their licence plate number.  Information easily gets lost and slips through the cracks in the mayhem after a crash.  Having your own easy access to the information of other parties involved will avoid having to rely on the police or the insurance company to pursue legal action.  This saves time and legal resources.
  5. Do not withhold details from the police. Describe in as much detail as you can the collision and everything leading up to it.  Describe everything you saw, felt and heard.  This will help ensure that these details make it into the police records, which is often one of the first places legal counsel will look in order to determine liability for a collision.
  6. Similarly, do not withhold details about any of your injuries to paramedics attending the scene. Report every ache and pain that you have and use descriptive words.  Is it sharp, is it dull, does it burn or does it tingle?  What body parts?  Use rating scales too, and say whether the pain is at 1, 5 or 10 out of 10.  Creating a paper trail of your injuries and impairments is important in personal injury lawsuits, and that paper trail often starts with the ambulance call records where the first responders will note your initial symptoms.
  7. Do not speak to insurance companies before talking to a lawyer. Do not give a recorded statement.  Do not sign anything.  What seems like a harmless detail could seriously hurt a claim down the line.
  8. Do not hire the first lawyer that comes knocking. Research potential lawyers to make sure you hire a lawyer from a firm with a proven track record of obtaining outstanding results for clients.  Here are things you should do before calling a personal injury lawyer, five questions to ask a personal injury lawyer and how to choose a personal injury lawyer.
  9. Do not miss a limitation. For most actions, the Limitations Act, 2002, SO 2002, c 24, Sch B, imposes a two-year limitation to start a lawsuit from the date of loss.  In the case of car accidents, the date of loss is the date of the accident so the limitation usually starts to run on that day.  That means you will have two years to take legal action and seek compensation for your injuries from the date of the car accident.  A claim started after the two-year mark is susceptible to being struck for missing the limitation so it is best to avoid that altogether by issuing the statement of claim and starting the lawsuit within two years of the accident.
  10. Do not give up. Legal proceedings can wear a person down by taking years to resolve.  Do not become defeated by this process and settle for a result that is less than what you deserve.
Dangerous Drivers | Can UV Light Disinfecting Devices Kill Viruses? | McLeish Orlando Personal Injury Lawyers

CBC News: Dangerous drivers; Can UV light disinfecting devices kill viruses?

Patrick Brown was interviewed by CBC News: The Marketplace, where he discussed the insufficient consequences for dangerous drivers.

If you or someone you know has been seriously injured in a pedestrian or motor vehicle collision, contact one of the personal injury lawyers at McLeish Orlando.

Scarring Meets the Threshold Under the Insurance Act | McLeish Orlando

Scarring Meets the Threshold Under the Insurance Act

Written By: Joseph A. Cescon and Ryan Marinacci, Student-at-Law

Scarring Meets the Threshold Under the Insurance Act | McLeish Orlando Personal Injury Lawyers

Extensive scarring is often indicative of serious injuries that will meet the threshold under s. 267.5(5)(b) of the Insurance Act.  But can scarring be so extensive as to meet the threshold in and of itself under ss. (5)(a)?

Yes, according to LaForme J (as he then was) in Zelney v Zelney, 1996 CarswellOnt 3848, and Doyle J in Carroll v Gilbert, 1994 CarswellOnt 3685.  However, the leading case on this issue remains Meyer v Bright, 1993 CanLII 3389 (ON CA), which along with Dalgliesh v Green and Lento v Castaldo form the trilogy of decisions that first interpreted the then newly enacted “threshold” provision under s. 266(1) (now s. 267.1) of the Insurance Act.

Briefly, s. 266 was enacted at the same time as Ontario created the no-fault benefits regime.  The five-judge panel in Meyer found that the purpose of s. 266 was to significantly limit the right of motor vehicle collision victims to sue third parties in exchange for more generous first-party benefits regardless of fault.  For reference, the current provision states:

(5) Despite any other Act and subject to subsections (6) and (6.1), the owner of an automobile, the occupants of an automobile and any person present at the incident are not liable in an action in Ontario for damages for non-pecuniary loss, including damages for non-pecuniary loss under clause 61 (2) (e) of the Family Law Act, from bodily injury or death arising directly or indirectly from the use or operation of the automobile, unless as a result of the use or operation of the automobile the injured person has died or has sustained,

(a)  permanent serious disfigurement; or

(b)  permanent serious impairment of an important physical, mental or psychological function.  1996, c. 21, s. 29; 2011, c. 9, Sched. 21, s. 3 (3).

The Meyer panel concluded that for an injury to meet the threshold under ss. (a), the disfigurement had to:

  • mar or detract from the appearance of the individual as a person, and
  • cause a change of style, clothes or lifestyle such that others are prevented from seeing the scarring.

In Dalgliesh, the 74-year old plaintiff’s 15-inch abdominal scar was found not to be serious although it was a disfigurement.  This was because the scarring did not cause any changes of clothing or lifestyle, and the Plaintiff maintained that it would never be seen by anyone.  Indeed, the panel wrote:

This scar has had little, if any, effect upon the life of Mrs. Dalgliesh. It is in a place where it would not normally be seen by others and in a part of her body which she had no intention of exposing to the view of any other person.

By contrast, the scarring met the threshold in Zelney and in Carroll.

In Zelney, the Plaintiff had scarring along both legs and her left elbow as well as minor scarring on her face.  LaForme J found that the arm and leg scarring met the test set out in Meyer because it would have a serious negative and harmful effect on her due to its location and extensive nature.  In describing the scarring, LaForme J wrote:

It is clear that the scars to the plaintiff’s arms and legs could be covered with very specific clothing but that they would be totally exposed and visible were the Plaintiff to wear shorts, a bathing suit or indeed, ordinary clothing which other women of her age and circumstance would freely wear. As I found, this woman is an active mother who is determined to continue on with her activities as before but I am convinced that she will always be self-conscious and embarrassed by the scars. In my view they will effect her ability to enjoy her life as she has been used to and it will require tremendous effort on her part to cope with the embarrassment and emotional stress that she must feel during those times of the year when warm weather attire will be worn, or when she is intimate with her husband.

In Carroll, the Plaintiff met the threshold on the basis of scarring to her left ear, right leg and left knee cap.  In concluding that the Plaintiff met the threshold, Doyle J wrote:

Melissa Carroll had a job as a lifeguard and taught others how to swim. Every single scar, except possibly the one on her right hip, could not be hidden if she puts on a bathing suit. She has already said she was embarrassed because of the scarring and this when she was barely sixteen years of age when the accident happened. Being so successful at swimming, she would probably be swimming for most of her life, that is, unless the embarrassment causes her to avoid swimming pools. There is a disfigurement, it is permanent and it is serious because of the effect on Melissa’s life.

Accordingly, scarring on its own can meet the threshold where others are likely to see the scars, resulting in a change of behaviour by the Plaintiff.

If you or a loved one have suffered a serious injury, contact the lawyers at McLeish Orlando for a free consultation.

Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc. | McLeish Orlando Personal Injury Lawyers

Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc., 2020 ONSC 4380

Written By: Nick Todorovic and Endrita Isaj, Student-at-Law

Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc. | McLeish Orlando Personal Injury Lawyers

The recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc., 2020 ONSC 4380 further clarified the law on the enforceability of waivers.

In Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc., the Plaintiff visited Sky Zone, an indoor trampoline and fun park in July of 2014. When attempting to land a back flip on the trampoline, the Plaintiff landed hard on his head, sustaining serious injuries, including a C7 vertebra fracture that required surgery.

The Plaintiff sued Sky Zone in negligence on the basis of an alleged breach of the Occupiers’ Liability Act.

The Defendant, Sky Zone, moved for summary judgment to have the action dismissed. Sky Zone maintained that the electronic waiver signed by the Plaintiff when he entered the premises was valid and enforceable, regardless of whether he read or understood it. Sky Zone’s position was that the Plaintiff was contractually barred from bringing a statutory claim under the Occupiers’ Liability Act, as reasonable steps were taken to bring the terms of the waiver to the Plaintiff’s attention. The court agreed that if an individual signs a waiver, but fails to read or understand its terms, it is immaterial and the waiver remains enforceable.

The issue before the court was whether Sky Zone took reasonable steps to bring the terms of the waiver to the Plaintiff’s attention.

The court found that there was a genuine issue requiring a trial. The court noted that the Plaintiff was not cross-examined on any of his evidence and Sky Zone did not present evidence of anyone who was present when the Plaintiff visited the premises in July 2014.

The Plaintiff’s evidence was that he had signed Sky Zone’s waiver on that one occasion when he visited and did not have familiarity with their website or any tools that could have referenced the contents of the waiver. The Plaintiff’s evidence was that he was told to be “quick” when signing the waiver at the kiosk or else he would lose jump time. The Plaintiff’s interaction with the kiosk was brief. He entered the premises at 8:05 p.m. and electronically signed the waiver document at 8:11 p.m. Moreover, the terms in the waiver of liability did not capture his attention by being highlighted, in bold, in colour, or through a prompt of any kind.[1]

The court held it would be dangerous to conclude that there was no genuine issue requiring trial given the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, which was unchallenged and uncontroverted.

The court followed the reasoning of Clarke v. Alaska Canopy Adventures. If the contents of the waiver are unusually onerous or where it is clear that the person signing did not know the terms, either because they had not read the terms or were not afforded enough time to do so, then the party seeking to rely on the waiver has reason to know that the person signing the waiver did not intend to agree to its terms.[2]

The Defendant’s factum set out the case law on the reasonable steps needed to be taken to bring a waiver to the attention of a participant. These included the use of websites, posting signs about the waiver, signing a waiver before participating, specific safeguards within the waiver itself, or having sufficient time to read the document. The court found that almost all of the case law did not apply to the facts of the case at bar.

The court concluded:

“Surely, the mere fact that there was a waiver requirement cannot, in law, constitute reasonable steps to bring the terms of the waiver to the attention of the participant.”[3]

The summary judgment motion brought by the defendant, Sky Zone, was dismissed. The court held there was a genuine issue requiring a trial as to whether Sky Zone took reasonable steps to bring the terms of the waiver to Plaintiff’s attention.

[1] Zaky v. 2285771 Ontario Inc., 2020 ONSC 4380 at para 27.

[2] Supra note 1, at para 29.

[3] Ibid at para 31.