In Davis v Wawanesa, 2015 ONSC 6624 (S.C.J.), the plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident in November 2013, before the
Regulation came into force , but the claim for attendant
care services was made after the Regulation was enacted. It was the plaintiff's position that since she was involved in the
accident prior to the date that the Regulation came into force, there should
not be a cap on the attendant care benefits.
The parties differed in their positions as to whether or
not Regulation 347/13 should apply retrospectively or prospectively. The
Regulation is silent on the issue of whether it applies to accidents that
occurred before its enactment. The court held that since the presumption
against retrospectivity was not rebutted by clear, legislative intent, the law
that applied was the law that was in force at the time of the accident. Thus,
Section 2 of Ontario Regulation 347/13 did not apply and the attendant care
benefits were not capped at the economic losses suffered by the attending
family member.
The court accepted that attendant care benefits are a
contractual right to which an injured person is entitled and the plaintiff had
a vested right to payment of the attendant care benefit to which she was
entitled on the date of her accident. Regulation 347/13 had a substantive
impact on the plaintiff's right to attendant care benefits, so the court held
that retrospectivity in this case would be undesirable. Since the Regulation interfered with the plaintiff's
substantive rights, the court held that it should not apply
retrospectively.