Alon S. Barda

The applicant sought income replacement benefits (IRB) and two treatment plans following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefits, relying on multiple independent medical examinations.

The Tribunal found that the applicant met the tests for both pre-104 and post-104 IRB, as he suffered from a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment and a complete inability to engage in any employment for which he was reasonably suited.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, noting that the respondent's assessors evaluated the applicant in silos and failed to provide an integrated assessment of his physical and psychological impairments.

The treatment plans for chiropractic services and a psychological assessment were deemed reasonable and necessary.

The claim for an award under s. 10 of O. Reg. 664 was dismissed, as the respondent's conduct was not found to be unreasonable.

The applicant, a taxi driver, sought statutory accident benefits after being assaulted by a passenger who refused to pay the fare.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the incident did not meet the definition of an 'accident' under s. 3(1) of the Schedule.

The Tribunal applied the purpose and causation test, finding that while the incident arose out of the ordinary use of an automobile, the assault was an intervening act that severed the chain of causation.

The application was dismissed as the injuries were not directly caused by the use or operation of the automobile.