Catharine Simons

The insurer requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that found the applicant entitled to Non-Earner Benefits (NEBs) following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer argued that the Tribunal failed to consider evidence of the applicant's ability to participate in pre-accident activities, improperly focused on only two areas of her life, and ignored her pre-existing psychological trauma.

The Executive Chair dismissed the request, finding that the Tribunal properly applied the legal test, weighed the evidence, and provided sufficient reasons for its conclusion that the applicant suffered a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The insurer brought a motion seeking the production of a tort defence medical report (a neurological examination) from the applicant's companion tort action.

The applicant opposed the motion, arguing it would unnecessarily lengthen and complicate the arbitration regarding her entitlement to post-104 week income replacement benefits.

The arbitrator applied the Sandhu factors and found that the insurer already possessed sufficient medical assessments, including two insurer examinations and a Disability DAC assessment.

Ordering production of the tort report would encourage a 'battle of numbers' and duplicate evidence.

The motion for production was dismissed.