Dr. Acharya

The applicant sought medical and rehabilitation benefits totaling $10,161.36 for goods and services, including an adjustable bed, massage chair, and moving costs, following a motor vehicle accident.

The adjudicator found that while the applicant had been removed from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and suffered from chronic pain, the requested items were not reasonable and necessary.

The evidence showed the applicant already possessed similar items in good condition, and the requested items were not recommended by his chronic pain specialist.

The application was dismissed, along with claims for interest and an award.

The appellant was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his wife.

The Crown's case was circumstantial, alleging the appellant raped and murdered the deceased.

On appeal, the appellant argued the verdict was unreasonable based on medical evidence regarding the time of death, and challenged the admissibility of expert evidence concerning genital injuries and a blood letter written in Chinese characters.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the verdict was reasonable as the medical evidence did not exonerate the appellant, and the expert evidence was properly admitted.