Matthew M. Létourneau

The applicant sought income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming physical and psychological impairments prevented him from working as a machine operator.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed medical evidence, including insurer examinations, which indicated the applicant's soft tissue injuries had resolved and his adjustment disorder did not cause a substantial inability to perform his light-duty work.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment during the disputed period.

The applicant sought an interim order for payment of statutory accident benefits due to delays in the hearing process.

The respondent argued the Licence Appeal Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to award interim benefits.

The Tribunal held that it does not have jurisdiction to award interim benefits, as the Insurance Act requires such powers to be explicitly granted by regulation, which the legislature has not done.

The preliminary issue was dismissed.

The applicant sought an interim order for payment of medical and attendant care benefits pending the final hearing of his statutory accident benefits dispute.

The respondent argued the Licence Appeal Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to award interim benefits.

The Tribunal agreed with the respondent, finding that recent amendments to the Insurance Act restricted its jurisdiction to make interim orders to those specifically provided for by regulation.

As no regulation currently permits interim benefits, the Tribunal concluded it has no jurisdiction to grant the requested relief and dismissed the preliminary issue.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits.

The respondent insurer denied the claim, arguing the applicant was excluded from coverage under paragraph 31(1)(b) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule for making a material misrepresentation or intentionally failing to notify the insurer of a material risk, as he was driving a vehicle he did not own or insure.

The Tribunal found that the applicant was in the process of purchasing the vehicle and did not intentionally fail to notify the insurer.

The Tribunal concluded the exclusion did not apply and ordered the respondent to pay the income replacement benefits with interest.

The applicant's request for an award was denied as the insurer's initial denial was not unreasonable.

The Appellant appealed the impoundment of his motor vehicle on two separate occasions, seeking reimbursement for towing and storage costs.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that it lacked the legal authority to hear the appeals because neither impoundment was ordered for a period of 45 days or more pursuant to section 55.1 of the Highway Traffic Act.

Both appeals were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for prescription medication expenses following a 2011 motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the expenses, arguing they were not reasonable, necessary, or caused by the accident.

The Tribunal found that the accident exacerbated the applicant's pre-existing condition and caused new impairments, including chronic pain syndrome and depression.

Relying on the evidence of the applicant's family physician, the Tribunal concluded that several medications, including Oxycodone and Fentanyl, were reasonable and necessary.

The application was partially granted, and the applicant was awarded entitlement to specific medications along with interest on overdue payments.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including physiotherapy, massage therapy, and psychotherapy.

The insurer initially denied the treatment plans but paid a portion of the incurred amounts on the eve of its written submissions.

The Tribunal found all six disputed treatment plans to be reasonable and necessary for treating the applicant's chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal also found that the insurer unreasonably delayed payment of the benefits after receiving sufficient medical information, and ordered a special award of 25% of the initial claim value, plus interest.

The applicant's request for costs was denied.

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

The insurer denied various treatment plans and expenses on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued she suffered from a psychological impairment and chronic pain syndrome, taking her outside the MIG.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish a psychological impairment or chronic pain syndrome caused by the accident.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue injuries subject to the $3,500 MIG limit, and dismissed the claims for additional treatment, expenses, and interest.