| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
car insurance |
|
|
Summary:
While payments received pursuant to ss. 12(1) of the Ontario No-Fault Benefits Schedule would clearly be "in respect of actual or presumed loss of income due to injury" within para. 57(2)(d), payments received pursuant to ss. 13(1) would equally clearly not be, since they are not income-related.
The question that arises for determination by Umpires in the context of a para. 57(2)(d) inquiry is not whether ss. 13(1) Ontario no-fault payments represent compensation for pain and suffering, but whether or not they represent compensation for loss of income from employment, actual or presumed.
CUBs 18443, 21067, 23255, 22427 and 25448 examined. In all of these cases the assumption was made, wrongly, in my view, that all payments made under provincial no-fault insurance plans are compensation for actual or presumed loss of income from employment due to injury from a motor vehicle accident.
Where payments under provincial no-fault benefit plans are in issue, a conclusion that payments made in one case are for loss of income from employment can only be reached after determining by reference to provincial legislation the purpose for which such payments were made.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
context and titles |
|
Summary:
The heading preceding ss. 12(1) is "Income Benefit" while the heading preceding ss. 13(1) is "Benefit If No Income". It is now well settled that, unlike marginal notes, headings may be used as aids to the construction of the language of an enactment.
