Robert Rock

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's determination that her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on a pre-existing back injury, chronic pain, and psychological impairments, and also claimed entitlement to Non-Earner Benefits (NEBs).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence to support removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's insurer's examinations which found no chronic pain or psychological condition requiring treatment beyond the MIG.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for NEBs, finding the applicant did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident but was denied by the respondent insurer on the basis that the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The adjudicator excluded late-filed medical evidence from the applicant due to non-compliance with disclosure rules.

Relying on the insurer's examinations, the adjudicator found the applicant failed to prove the injuries warranted removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the disputed treatment plans and claims for interest were dismissed.

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 Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of chronic pain with functional impairment or a psychological impairment to warrant removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal also found the applicant did not demonstrate a complete inability to carry on a normal life, dismissing the claim for non-earner benefits.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to Non-Earner Benefits (NEBs) and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life, noting he had resumed working as an Uber driver.

The Tribunal also found insufficient evidence to warrant removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's medical assessments which found no significant functional or psychological impairments.

The application was dismissed.

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 injury, chronic pain, and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to demonstrate that her injuries warranted removal from the MIG, preferring the respondent's medical evidence that the injuries were uncomplicated soft tissue injuries and that there was no accident-related psychological injury.

The application for benefits and interest was dismissed.

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 workplace injury sustained the day prior.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence substantiating a pre-existing injury that would preclude her recovery within the MIG.

As the applicant remained subject to the $3,500 MIG limit, the disputed treatment plans were not reviewed, and the application was dismissed.

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 applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing for removal from the MIG due to a pre-existing injury, chronic pain, and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that his accident-related impairments warranted removal from the MIG, as the medical evidence did not support a pre-existing condition precluding recovery or a diagnosis of chronic pain.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

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

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, arguing she should be removed from the MIG due to pre-existing anxiety, chronic pain, and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to substantiate the pre-existing anxiety or that the applicant suffered from chronic pain with a functional impairment.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor, and she remained subject to the $3,500 MIG limit.

The application for the disputed treatment plans and assessments was dismissed.