DAKOTA FORSTER is a passionate and experienced advocate dedicated to providing effective solutions for his clients. Dakota maintains a broad litigation practice focused on tort claims, construction law, health law, class actions, professional negligence, commercial disputes, appeals, and insurance coverage matters. Dakota’s breadth of experience has made him an expert in distilling complex legal and factual issues into clear and compelling arguments.
While Dakota strives to provide early and cost-effective resolutions outside the courtroom, he is equally emphatic in representing his clients’ interests before the courts.
Dakota has represented clients and been involved in files at all levels of court in Ontario, and in various administrative tribunals and private arbitrations. Dakota routinely argues and is involved in bringing complex motions, applications, and appeals. Dakota has appeared before the Small Claims Court, Superior Court of Justice, and Divisional Court as well as the Licence Appeal Tribunal and Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal.
Prior to joining the firm Dakota worked at a prominent insurance defence litigation boutique in Toronto. Dakota also has prior experience working both at a family law firm and intellectual property litigation boutique.
Dakota received his Juris Doctor from the University of Toronto Faculty of Law and his B.A. (Hons.) in Political Studies and Psychology from Queen’s University. While at law school Dakota was an active caseworker and research assistant for the Pro Bono Students Canada Family Law Project and Trans Family Law Project, as well as the International Human Rights Program.
Dakota is a member of the Canadian and Ontario Bar Association, the Toronto Lawyers Association, and the Medico-Legal Society of Toronto.
When not practicing law Dakota is looking for the next great coffee shop, restaurant, dog park and hiking trail in and around Toronto.
- Successfully opposed the appeal of an administrative tribunal’s decision on the grounds of alleged breaches of procedural fairness and insufficiency of reasons: Vespa v. Aviva General Insurance, 2022 ONSC 3283 (Div. Ct.)
- Successfully opposed applications for statutory accident benefits beyond those provided for in the Minor Injury Guideline (“MIG”) on the basis that the applicants did not meet the criteria for removal from the MIG, nor were the proposed treatment plans reasonable or necessary: Arsovski v. Aviva General Insurance, 2021 CanLII 19497 (ON LAT); Aviva General Insurance Company v. Fynn, 2021 CanLII 35582 (ON LAT); Gabriel v. Economical Insurance Company, 2023 CanLII 23515 (ON LAT); Peer v. Aviva General Insurance, 2023 CanLII 58463.