• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Blog

Logo 1 Created with Sketch.

  • About
  • Our Lawyers
    • Andrew Wray
    • Juan Echavarria
  • Expertise
    • Employment Law
    • Civil Litigation
  • Blog
  • COVID-19 Resources
  • Contact Us
  • Book a Consultation
long-term-disability-benefits-limitation-period

Long-Term Disability Benefits: Don’t Miss your Limitation Period!

February 14, 2020 Tags: Blog, Limitation Period, Long-Term Disability Benefits

Long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits provide income supplement when one is not able to work for reasons related to injury or illness. Typically, one has access LTD benefits through a group health benefits plan with their employer. If you become totally disabled and unable to work because of injury or illness, you should consult with your doctor and obtain the LTD benefits application form and procedure from your employer. During this difficult period, it is important to know the deadlines and timelines that apply to your insurance policy so that you can submit your claim on-time.

In this blog post we will be exploring the hot topic of the 2-year limitation period that applies at law if your application for LTD benefits is denied by your insurer and you must sue your insurer to obtain the benefits you are entitled to.

Beware: Benefits Denied

It is unfortunately all too common that one’s application for LTD benefits gets denied by the insurer. Depending on your policy, there might be several levels of internal appeal that you can try, providing further medical evidence and support of your claim to your insurer. Other times, the insurer may deny your initial application, but keep the claim open and invite you to submit further medical evidence upon which it will reassess your claim for benefits.

One must be careful not to miss the 2-year limitation period that applies at law by getting bogged down in endless appeals with the insurer. These seemingly open-ended invitations where the insurer keeps open the possibility of reconsidering their denial have been the source of litigation for the past few years.

What is a Limitation Period and When does it Apply?

In Ontario, the Limitations Act, 2002 creates a basic 2-year limitation on starting a law suit, meaning that if one has a legal claim to make, they must do so within 2 years of when the claim was discovered. The tricky part, which is the source of debate in many of these LTD limitation period cases, is determining exactly when a claim is “discovered.” For example, is it 2 years from the date of the first denial? Two years from the date of denial of the last appeal? What happens if an insurer does not clearly deny a claim and rather keeps it open for on-going review?

Clarke v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently addressed this issue in the case of Clarke v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2020 ONCA 11.  In this case, Sun Life had brought a motion to dismiss the claim on the basis that it was statute-barred by virtue of the limitation period. The motions judge dismissed Sun Life’s motion finding that Clarke’s action was not statue-barred. Sun Life appealed and the Court of Appeal was tasked with determining the operation of a limitation period where the insurer corresponded with the insured that they remained open to receiving additional documents and a subsequent reconsideration.

In this case, Clarke applied for LTD benefits in 2011 and was first denied by the insurer in March 2012. She was eventually approved for benefits, but only for the duration of the “own occupation” period, which is typically the first two years of disability. Clarke advised the insurer in 2014 that she intended to appeal the denial of further benefits.

There was no correspondence between the parties until 2017 when Clarke provided additional medical documentation to the insurer. In response, despite the passage of 3 years, the insurer informed Clarke that they would review the decision to deny benefits, but confirmed the denial a few months later.

In its final denial letter of June 19, 2017, the insurer once again informed Clarke that a final level appeal was available.

The Court of Appeal allowed Sun Life’s appeal in part, clarifying the discoverability principle and test in cases of LTD benefit denials, and sending the matter back for trial on the issue of the limitation period.

The Court’s Analysis

On the issue as to whether the claim was statute-barred, the Court of Appeal considered section 5 of the Limitations Act, 2002. On the basis of the “discoverability principle,” the Court had to determine the day on which Clarke first knew that a proceeding would be the appropriate course of action to seek the remedy for the nature of loss she had experienced. This date then has to be compared with the date a reasonable person ought to have known, where the presumption is a claim is known on the day the act or omission took place. The claim is then considered “discovered” at law on the earlier of these two dates. In Ontario, a litigant is required to bring an action within 2 years from the date the claim is discovered.

The Court relied on the principle that “an insured has a cause of action for breach of contract against her insurer when the insurer stops paying long-term disability benefits.” In this case, Sun Life informed Clarke on February 24, 2014 that her LTD benefits were terminated and that date, not the final appeal denial date of June 19, 2017, was when a reasonable person in the circumstances would have known that a loss, injury or damage had occurred. The next issue was determining when a proceeding would have been an appropriate means to remedy the loss. On this point, the Court found that the motions judge failed to apply the appropriate limitation period test and due to a lack of factual foundation before the Court decided to send the matter back down for trial.

On this latter point of considering the facts of each specific case to decide when a proceeding would be an appropriate means to remedy a loss, the Ontario Court of Appeal, in the case of Kassburg v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, 2014 ONCA 922, held that the limitation period did not begin to run until the insurer communicated unequivocally a final decision that the claim was denied and that there were no more appeal rights.

Take Away

Clarke confirms the importance of respecting limitation periods in LTD insurance cases and re-affirms the application of the “discoverability principle” to LTD benefit insurance disputes including the very fact specific nature of each case. It is important to consult with a lawyer about your rights and the deadlines involved in your case. At Wray Legal LLP we are very experienced in long-term disability benefit cases and have an excellent track record of success.  Our very own Andrew Wray was counsel to Ms. Kassburg in the case noted above that created a precedent setting decision protecting the rights of individuals in Ontario. If you have a disability benefits case and are looking for representation, we invite you to contact one of our experienced and trusted lawyers.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Misrepresentations in LTD Insurance
  • Employment Bonus After Termination
  • How will COVID affect notice of termination
  • How do fixed-term contracts affect employment rights upon termination?
  • COVID Update: requirements for workplaces

Tags

Blog Civil Litigation Covid Employment Law Covid Mental Health Covid Wrongful Termination Employment Employment Law Health and Safety Human Rights Juan Echavarria Just Cause Termination Limitation Period Long-Term Disability Benefits LTD Benefits LTD Insurance Benefits News Resignation Sale of Business Severance Pay Stock Options termination notice Total Disability wrongful dismissal

Footer

Contact Us

181 University Avenue, Suite 2200 Toronto, Ontario Canada M5H 3M7

T 416-642-0460
F 416-363-7875

Contact Page LinkedIn
Book a Consultation






    Please note that contact through our website is for informational purpose only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship.

    * Required

    Reviews

    • I had the pleasure of working with Andrew & his team and I could not be more thankful for having them represent me during a very trying time. They were very knowledgeable and helped guide me thru the entire process. Going thru any legal issue can be very emotionally draining but knowing I had Andrew on my side def helped ease my anxiety. In the end, Andrew was able to win my dispute and I owe it all to his attention to detail and wealth of knowledge.

      Charlene De Silva

    • Robert Tarantino and his associates at Wray Legal handled my case against my former employer with compassion, ethically sound expert advice in plain language and professional courtesy during my termination process, a stressful event in any working person's life. I was presented with all potential courses of action during my initial meeting prior to making a decision to retain services, and was treated with respect and dignity every step of the way. Wray Legal was able to mediate an acceptable settlement without having to proceed with a formal human rights violation compliant at the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. Thank you Robert, Andrew and Samantha.

      Ian G.

    • We contracted with Robert Tarantino of Wray Legal to do a respectful workplaces presentation to our organization. This was part of a follow up to a StressAssess.ca survey we had done with all of our staff. Robert’s presentation included: Introduction; Overview – Why ‘Respectful Workplaces’ is an Important Topic; What is a Respectful Workplace?; Occupational Health and Safety Act – workplace harassment; Human Rights Code – discrimination in employment; Fostering a Healthy and Respectful Workplace; and Q & A – Discussion. The presentation was extremely well done, very engaging and included excellent examples. Robert did an excellent job and I would highly recommend his services.

      Michael Roche

      CEO, Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers

    • I am grateful to have worked with Andrew Wray on a Third Party Claim that was filed against me. While we arrived at a very amicable conclusion, it was a rather complex route to get there. Andrew was extremely patient with both me and the other party. His legal advice was insightful and he always acted in an extremely professional manner. I asked a lot of questions regarding law and process and Andrew always took the time to ensure that I was comfortable with both. I really had the feeling that he was actually working for me and looking out for my best interests. I would have no reservations about contacting Andrew again for help, nor would I have any reservations in recommending him to a friend or colleague. Many thanks!!

      KM

    • Andrew Wray helped me settle a dispute with my past employer which lead to a healthy settlement. I would recommend Andrew to anyone looking for a professional and cost-effective litigator.

      A Google User

    • Andrew Wray came highly recommended and now I know why! Andrew took a personal and very supportive approach as he helped to guide me through a long and challenging labour hearing process that had already cost me too many sleepless nights. His demonstrated understanding of the complex legal and procedural issues gave me a tremendous confidence. Having never previously testified or given evidence, his advice on what I could expect on the stand was worth its weight in gold. I was kepy completely in the loop with regard to strategies and next steps, and was always made to feel like I was steering the ship - with Andrew as my formidable engine. Oh, and by the way, we won the case! :)

      Jamie S.

    © 2021 Wray Legal LLP
    Site by Cameron Duncalfe
    Privacy Policy