David M. Woolcott

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy and chiropractic treatment plans.

The respondent denied the plans on the basis that they were not reasonable and necessary, not causally related to the accident, and not incurred.

The Tribunal found the physiotherapy treatment plan was reasonable and necessary, less fees for previous plans, as the medical evidence supported ongoing therapy for low back pain.

The chiropractic treatment plan was denied for lack of supporting evidence.

The Tribunal also held that the respondent is liable to pay for reasonable and necessary treatment once incurred, rejecting the argument that treatment must be incurred before it can be approved.

No interest was awarded as no payments were overdue.

The appellant appealed a trial judgment holding him personally liable for a corporate debt of $89,969.11 based on a standard form contract.

The Court of Appeal found the contract ambiguous, as the signature line indicated he was signing in a representative capacity, contradicting a clause imposing personal liability.

Applying the doctrine of contra proferentem, and noting the respondent failed to draw the appellant's attention to the personal liability clause in what was presented as a credit application, the Court allowed the appeal.

The action against the appellant personally was dismissed.