The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming he sustained a catastrophic impairment.
The respondent denied the catastrophic designation, alleging the applicant was malingering, and denied treatment plans for chiropractic care and assessments.
The Tribunal found the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment, preferring the evidence of the applicant's experts over the respondent's neuropsychologist, who used outdated tests and viewed her role as a 'detective'.
The Tribunal denied the chiropractic treatment plan as it was largely outside the scope of chiropractic practice.
The cost of a neuropsychological assessment was approved as reasonable and necessary, while a triage assessment was denied.
