|
Appeal - Fresh Evidence (5). Muddapati v. Primmum Insurance Company
In Muddapati v. Primmum Insurance Company (Ont Div Ct, 2026) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed an appeal, this brought against "a preliminary issue decision of the Licence Appeal Tribunal .... in which the Tribunal found that she was barred from proceeding with her application by the doctrine of res judicata".
The court considered a fresh evidence issue, here regarding the earlier availability of particular evidence:[23] I also would not interfere with the Tribunal’s rejection of the medical report as a basis for waiving res judicata. The medical examiner reached a new diagnosis, but, as the Tribunal found, the doctor did not consider new information that was previously unavailable. As G.P. Smith J. stated in Penny v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Co., [2006] O.J. No. 2858 (SCJ), at para. 78, to allow a party to submit better medical evidence after an unsatisfactory initial result would “make a mockery of the principle of the finality of litigation.” Although in that case, the plaintiff had obtained the new report, rather than submitting a report following an insurer’s examination, the point is that the appellant could have obtained her own medical report before the initial hearing. In any event, it is not clear the new report would have assisted the appellant, since it did not address the MIG issue and the doctor concluded the benefits sought were not reasonable and necessary.
|
