Christine McKenna

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for physical and psychological injuries allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the claims, arguing that the accident was not the cause of the applicant's impairments, pointing to extensive pre-existing medical and psychological issues, including trauma from Syria and family legal troubles.

The Tribunal applied the 'but for' test and found that the applicant failed to prove the accident was a necessary cause of her impairments.

Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the requested medical benefits and catastrophic impairment assessments were not reasonable and necessary, or were duplicative and contrary to the Schedule.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle as a pedestrian and sought statutory accident benefits for physical and psychological injuries.

The insurer limited her medical and rehabilitation benefits to $3,500, arguing her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline.

The applicant claimed she suffered from chronic pain, a nerve impingement, and a psychological condition (PTSD) that removed her from the minor injury limit.

The Tribunal found that her physical soft tissue injuries had resolved and rejected her psychological expert's report because the expert had never actually met her.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant sustained predominantly minor injuries and dismissed her claims for further medical benefits and assessments.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically claiming entitlement to an orthopaedic assessment and a chiropractic treatment plan.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the orthopaedic assessment was a duplication of previous services and not reasonable or necessary.

The Tribunal also found that the chiropractic treatment plan addressed injuries that were not accident-related and that the applicant had already achieved several of the plan's goals.

As no benefits were payable, the claims for interest and an award for unreasonable delay were also dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits for chiropractic treatment under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The respondent insurer denied the treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that two of the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary to provide pain relief, relying on the applicant's medical evidence over the insurer's examination report.

A third treatment plan was denied as it was a duplication of a previously approved plan.

The applicant was also awarded interest on the overdue benefits.