Motion raised complex and somewhat novel issues

H was driving B's vehicle when it went out of control and was struck by another vehicle. B was seriously injured, H was catastrophically injured, and S lost his life. Several lawsuits were brought and most settled, including action brought by B. H obtained judgment against B. H brought motion for directions on priorities and entitlement to insurance monies; declaration, in accordance with doctrine of marshalling, that H claim rank in priority to B and S claims; and declaration that B settlement monies received were not exempt from attachment or execution and confirming H's right to garnish those funds directly from insurance companies. Request to apply doctrine of marshalling was dismissed. Insurer of B vehicle was ordered to pay out insurance funds on pro rata basis. Insurer for H was ordered to pay remaining amounts to B and to S family (up to policy limits). H was entitled to garnish 20 per cent of B settlement. Submissions were made as to costs. H ordered to pay costs to B in amount of $20,000. On motion, parties filed numerous affidavits, factums, and books of authorities. Long motion was argued over two days, with additional written material filed in interim. Motion raised complex and somewhat novel issues. Both H and B suffered serious injuries, so potential consequences of decision were significant.

House v. Baird (2019), 2019 CarswellOnt 12383, 2019 ONSC 4458, Catrina D. Braid J. (Ont. S.C.J.); additional reasons (2019), 2019 CarswellOnt 3750, 2019 ONSC 1712, Catrina D. Braid J. (Ont. S.C.J.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca