Rasha El Sissi

The applicant sought entitlement to a treatment plan for optometric services and vision therapy costing $4,686.00 following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefit based on an independent examination concluding there was no accident-related oculo-visual impairment.

The Tribunal found the applicant met his burden of proving the treatment was reasonable and necessary, relying on evidence from his treating optometrists and occupational therapist connecting his vision complaints to post-concussive symptoms.

The treatment plan was approved.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on a pre-existing back condition.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had a documented history of back pain, there was no compelling medical evidence stating that the pre-existing condition precluded maximal recovery if kept within the MIG.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor, subject to the $3,500 MIG limit, and dismissed the claims for the disputed treatment plan and interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing her injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to a pre-existing condition and chronic pain.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence that her pre-existing neck and back pain precluded maximal recovery within the MIG.

Furthermore, the applicant did not establish chronic pain, as the independent orthopedic assessment lacked sufficient explanation and she failed to meet the criteria under the AMA Guides.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor, dismissing the claims for an orthopedic assessment and interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming his physical and psychological injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor, noting that his self-reported symptoms were inconsistent and did not demonstrate functional impairment.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's s. 44 assessors over the applicant's pre-screening report.

The application for treatment plans, an award for unreasonable delay, and interest was dismissed.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for a treatment plan proposing physiotherapy and chiropractic services totaling $3,388.40.

The respondent denied the plan, arguing the accident-related injuries had resolved and the applicant's ongoing complaints were unrelated to the accident.

The Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including clinical notes and an independent medical examination, did not support the proposed treatment for the applicant's accident-related impairments.

The application was dismissed, and no interest was payable.