Isabel Stramwasser

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After his legal representatives withdrew due to a breakdown in the relationship, the applicant failed to attend the pre-hearing discussion and the arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator proceeded in his absence and dismissed the claims, finding the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof.

The insurer was awarded $500 in expenses due to the applicant's failure to participate, which prolonged and obstructed the proceedings.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After her legal representatives withdrew due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, the applicant failed to attend the scheduled arbitration hearing despite being given notice and an adjournment.

The arbitrator dismissed the claims because the applicant failed to participate and meet her burden of proof.

The insurer was awarded $1,500 in expenses for legal fees and obtaining an OHIP summary, but its request for reimbursement of a $3,000 assessment fee was denied.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

Her legal representatives withdrew prior to the hearing.

The applicant failed to attend the rescheduled arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator dismissed the applicant's claims for failing to meet the burden of proof.

The insurer was awarded $1,500 in expenses due to the applicant's failure to participate, which prolonged the proceedings.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought enhanced statutory accident benefits, claiming a catastrophic impairment based on three Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores of 9.

The insurer denied the claim, arguing the applicant sustained only a minor injury and that the GCS scores were not caused by a brain impairment resulting from the accident.

The arbitrator found that the applicant sustained a concussion, which qualifies as a brain impairment, and that the impairment was caused by the accident.

Applying the Divisional Court's ruling in Hodges, the arbitrator held that the GCS score is conclusive and an inquiry into the seriousness of the brain injury is irrelevant.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment within the meaning of the Schedule.