Schultz Law Group

ABOUT

Camilla Oblak is an Associate at Schultz Law Group LLP. She was called to the Ontario Bar in 2023.

Prior to joining Schultz Law Group LLP, Camilla worked at an Insurance Defence law firm for seven years initially as a legal assistant and then moving into a law clerk position. Camilla attended law school in the UK at the University of Birmingham where she obtained her LLB. During law school, she was a member of the Pro Bono Group, where she volunteered at the Central England Law Centre Legal Aid Office assisting with immigration and asylum disputes during the height of Brexit.

Camilla practices primarily in insurance defence litigation and accident benefit claims. She represents clients before the License Appeal Tribunal, the Small Claims Court, and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.

Outside work, she enjoys traveling, exploring new food spots, and spending time with her family and friends.

WORK EXPERIENCE

Associate, Schultz Law Group LLP – September 2024 to Present

Associate, Kostyniuk & Greenside Lawyers, Toronto – September 2023 to September 2024

Articling Student, Kostyniuk & Greenside Lawyers, Toronto – November 2021 to September 2022

Law Clerk/ Legal Assistant, Kostyniuk & Greenside Lawyers, Toronto – July 2016 to November 2021

EDUCATION

Year of Call: 2023

NCA, Federation of Law Societies, issued on November 5, 2021

University of Birmingham, LLB (2020)

University of Toronto, Double Major BA, Criminology and Sociology (2016)

CASES

Selvaratnam v Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 6215 (ON LAT),

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Applicant claimed entitlement to physiotherapy costs beyond the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit, arguing that pre-existing conditions and chronic pain removed him from the MIG. The Tribunal found that the Applicant did not meet his burden to show that his injuries fell outside the MIG

Alnahlawi v Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 15083 (ON LAT),

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Applicant sought funding for psychological and physiotherapy treatment as well as psychological and orthopedic assessment plans, arguing that he suffered from chronic pain and psychological impairments that warranted removal from the MIG. The Tribunal rejected several procedural objections raised by the insurer as the Adjudicator preferred to decide the issues in dispute on their merits.

Speid v Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 26851 (ON LAT),

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Tribunal found that the Applicant’s injuries remained confined within the MIG and the denial letters and notices were in accordance with s.38(8) and s.44(5) of the SABS.

Jorabian v Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 29565 (ON LAT),

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Tribunal found that the Applicant sustained a minor injury and was subject to treatment within the MIG. The Tribunal found that the Applicant was not entitled to the OCF-18s in dispute or interest.

Gupan v Definity Insurance Company, 2026 CanLII 31456 (ON LAT),

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Tribunal dismissed the Applicant’s claim for accident benefits on the basis that he was statute-barred from proceeding

24-009251/AABS Pathuraj Tharmarajah vs. Definity Insurance Company

2026-05-11

READ SUMMARY +

The Tribunal determined that the Applicant remains subject to the minor injury. Vice-Chair Maich agreed with the preliminary issue submissions that the Applicant was not in compliance with his obligations under section 44(9) of the Schedule and that section 55(1) applied. As such, the Applicant was barred from proceeding with several of the disputed treatment plans. Definity was determined to be not liable for any expenses incurred pursuant to the remaining treatment plans in dispute.

Selvaratnam v Economical Mutual Insurance Company

2026-01-28

READ SUMMARY + READ NOW

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

PUBLICATIONS

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

Upcoming Events

Future events will be posted soon.

Camilla's Latest Speaking Engagements

Search by Year

BLOG