Tyler Moore

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident but passed away before the written hearing.

The applicant's representative withdrew after being unable to locate an estate trustee to provide instructions.

As no submissions or evidence were filed on behalf of the deceased applicant, the Tribunal proceeded with the hearing pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden to demonstrate a catastrophic impairment or entitlement to the disputed benefits.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant and respondent both requested reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that dismissed the application for failure to file submissions.

The parties had previously informed the Tribunal that a settlement had been reached and was awaiting court approval because the applicant is a minor.

The Tribunal found that there was a misunderstanding of fact based on the parties' correspondence, satisfying the grounds for reconsideration under Rule 18.2(b).

The original decision was cancelled and the file was closed without prejudice pending court approval of the settlement.

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

The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence.

Proceeding under section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet his onus to demonstrate entitlement to the disputed benefits or removal from the Minor Injury Guideline.

The application was dismissed.

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

The matter proceeded to a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any submissions or evidence.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet his evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to removal from the Minor Injury Guideline or to the disputed chronic pain assessment.

The application was dismissed.

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) and seeking funding for a psychological assessment.

The Tribunal ordered a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence by the deadline.

Proceeding under section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet her evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to removal from the MIG or the disputed benefits.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Tribunal decision that found her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied her treatment plans.

The applicant argued the Tribunal misinterpreted the medical evidence of her expert and erred by allowing the insurer to rely on a MIG position without conducting a section 44 examination.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that section 44 examinations are not mandatory and that the original decision correctly weighed the medical evidence, including a CT scan that contradicted the applicant's expert regarding a suspected spinal fracture.

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

The matter proceeded to a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any submissions or evidence and did not respond to Tribunal communications.

The Tribunal proceeded in the applicant's absence pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The application was dismissed as the applicant failed to meet her evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to the disputed benefits.

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit following a motor vehicle accident.

Prior to the written hearing, the applicant passed away and their surviving spouse declined to act as estate administrator.

No submissions or evidence were filed on behalf of the applicant.

The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to the benefits.

The self-represented applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming catastrophic impairment and entitlement to a medical benefit for psychological services.

The matter proceeded to a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence.

Consequently, the Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden and dismissed the application.

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

The matter proceeded to a written hearing.

The applicant's representative was removed prior to the hearing, and the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence.

Proceeding under section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet her evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to removal from the Minor Injury Guideline, income replacement benefits, medical benefits, or an award.

The application was dismissed.

The self-represented applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline.

The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence.

Proceeding under section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet his evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to the disputed benefits.

The application was dismissed.

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

The matter proceeded to a written hearing.

The applicant's representative withdrew, and the applicant failed to respond to multiple Tribunal communications or file any written submissions.

The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing in the applicant's absence pursuant to section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The application was dismissed as the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to the claimed benefits.

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

The matter proceeded to a written hearing before the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The applicant's representative removed themselves prior to the hearing, and the applicant failed to file any submissions or evidence.

The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet the evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to removal from the Minor Injury Guideline or entitlement to the disputed medical and attendant care benefits.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a preliminary issue decision that found her application for accident benefits statute-barred due to a failure to notify the insurer in time.

The Tribunal granted the reconsideration, finding it had committed a material breach of procedural fairness by focusing on the applicant's notice to the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund rather than the respondent insurer, Allstate.

Upon reconsidering the merits, the Tribunal found that the applicant, who was struck as a pedestrian by an initially unidentified motorist, had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in notifying Allstate.

The applicant took extensive steps over three years to identify the motorist and the insurer, and notified Allstate within days of identifying it.

The previous decision was cancelled, and the matter was ordered to proceed to a hearing on the substantive issues.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a preliminary issue decision which found she was not an 'insured person' under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule because she was not a dependant of the named insured.

The applicant argued the Tribunal breached procedural fairness by denying a virtual hearing and made errors of law and fact in assessing her dependency.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the request, finding no breach of procedural fairness as the applicant failed to object to the written hearing format, and concluding that the original decision properly considered the evidence of financial and emotional dependency.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that denied entitlement to attendant care benefits and various treatment plans.

The applicant argued the Tribunal erred in law by failing to find that temporary pain relief is sufficient to deem a treatment plan reasonable and necessary, and sought to introduce a new medical report.

The Vice-Chair dismissed the request, finding no error of law or fact, as temporary pain relief alone does not automatically justify that a treatment is necessary without functional improvement.

The Vice-Chair also rejected the new medical report because the applicant failed to demonstrate that it could not have been obtained prior to the original hearing.

The applicant sought an income replacement benefit and an award following a motor vehicle accident.

The matter proceeded to a written hearing before the Licence Appeal Tribunal.

The applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence and did not request an extension.

The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing and dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to meet their evidentiary burden.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's determination that their injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline and seeking income replacement benefits and a treatment plan.

The matter was scheduled for a written hearing.

The applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence by the deadline.

The Tribunal proceeded with the hearing pursuant to s. 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

As the applicant bore the onus of proof and provided no evidence, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to demonstrate entitlement to the disputed benefits.

The application was dismissed.

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

The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing, but neither party filed submissions.

The applicant indicated by email that a settlement had been reached and was awaiting court approval, but no Notice of Withdrawal was filed.

Proceeding under section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the Tribunal dismissed the application because the applicant failed to meet his evidentiary burden to demonstrate entitlement to the claimed benefits.

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

The Tribunal ordered a written hearing, but the applicant failed to file any written submissions or evidence, nor did he request an extension or withdraw the application.

Consequently, the Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet his evidentiary burden to demonstrate removal from the MIG or entitlement to the disputed medical benefits and interest.

The application was dismissed.