Jean-Claude (J.-C.) Rioux

“When defending or prosecuting cases for our clients, I keep focused on the relevant facts, the law, and the goal our client wants to achieve. I pride myself on providing our clients with sound, candid legal advice and effective representation.”

Markham – Ottawa
416-368-0231 ext. 8251

Thu Nguyen, Assistant/Law Clerk
416-368-0231 ext. 8252
Nadia Darawee, Assistant
416-368-0231 ext. 8275

J.-C. is a multitalented advocate who has earned a reputation as an exceptional litigator. He is regularly retained on matters related to insurance claims including complex motor vehicle accident tort and statutory accident benefits claims and related disputes.

His presentation of a case is marked by his strategic thinking and commanding presence. He has tried cases before judges and juries and has been before the Ontario Court of Appeal. He has conducted private arbitrations on loss transfer and priority disputes and has argued hearings before the Financial Services Commission on Ontario and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal.

J.-C. takes pride in his ability to successfully advance a wide range of client interests. Notable examples of advocacy include Wawanesa v. Unifund et al., Abebe Deres v. Van Daalen, Giordano v. Royal & SunAlliance, Grewal v. Ivany, T.D. v. Sivakumar, Markel v. The Personal, and Yousef v. RBC.


Called to the Ontario Bar, 2001
Called to the Nova Scotia Bar, 2000
LL.B., Law Foundation Scholar, Dalhousie Law School, 1999
B.A (First Class Honors) McGill, 1994


Advocate’s Society
Canadian Bar Association

Selection of Cases

Summary judgment on a limitation period: Grewal v. Ivany, 2007 CanLII 55700 (ONSC).

Negligence, Commercial General Liability, Adverse Inference: Nestle v. Canadian Pest Control.

Evidence: TD Insurance Home and Auto v. Sivakumar, 2008 CanLII 15227 (ONSC) – Application for taking of evidence de bene esse.

Fault Determination: Motors v. Old Republic – Ordinary rules of law applied, applicant’s insured driver 80% at fault.

Fault Determination, Evidence: Aviva v. Intact – Aviva’s theory of liability accepted due to evidence in chief of driver.

Limitations, Priority Dispute: Personal Insurance v. Markel Insurance<> – Investigation within 90 days was insufficient.

Statutory Interpretation re Priority Dispute: Wawanesa v. MVACF – Purposive interpretation of Insurance Act and Regulation 283/95 made Wawanesa highest in priority.

Non-Earner Benefit, Dismissed, Evidence: A.V. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company, 2020 LAT – applicant’s claim for non-earner benefits dismissed due to careful cross-examination.

Accident Benefits Evidence: TF v. Certas Direct Insurance Company, 2019 LAT – applicant’s claim dismissed because cross-examination showed that she worked about as much after the accident as she did before.

Section 30 of SABS, Appeals: Royal & Sun Alliance ats Giordano, FSCO – section 30 penalties imposed for driving without a license.

Alleged Job Offer, SABS, Evidence: RBC ats Yousef, FSCO – alleged job offer, alleged brain injury – all of applicant’s witnesses disbelieved.