Dr. Abdalhakim Mustafa

The applicant sought a post-104-week income replacement benefit (IRB) following a motor vehicle accident, which the respondent insurer denied.

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffers a complete inability to engage in any employment for which she is reasonably suited by education, training, or experience, primarily due to chronic pain syndrome and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's expert assessors over the respondent's assessors, noting that the alternate employment roles proposed by the respondent were not comparable in status or wages.

The applicant was awarded the IRB and interest on overdue payments, but her claim for a special award under section 10 of Regulation 664 was dismissed as the insurer's conduct was not found to be unreasonable or vexatious.

The applicant, a minor, sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied several treatment plans for occupational therapy, social rehabilitation counselling, rehabilitation therapy, and psychological services.

The Tribunal found the applicant entitled to the outstanding balance for occupational therapy and the full amount for rehabilitation therapy, as medical evidence supported their necessity for addressing cognitive and functional impairments.

However, the Tribunal denied the plans for social rehabilitation counselling and psychological services due to insufficient evidence, duplication, and non-compliance with the Professional Services Guideline.

Claims for a section 10 award and costs were also dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for chiropractic, occupational therapy, and speech therapy treatment plans, as well as an award for unreasonably withheld payments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove the chiropractic and speech therapy plans were reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of objective medical evidence and the duplicative nature of the speech therapy assessment.

The Tribunal partially approved the occupational therapy plan, awarding $150 for a heating pad, but denied the remainder.

The claim for an award under Regulation 664 was dismissed, as the insurer's conduct was not unreasonable.