Ahmed Afifi

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit (NEB) and funding for physiotherapy and psychological services following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life due to significant inconsistencies in his self-reports regarding employment and daily activities.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's physiatry assessment over the applicant's evidence, concluding the proposed treatment plans were not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for interest and an award were also dismissed.

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit, interest, and an award under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal applied the Heath framework and found that the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence of the frequency and time commitments of his pre-accident activities to allow for a proper comparison with his post-accident abilities.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's insurer examination reports, which concluded the applicant did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life from either a musculoskeletal or psychological perspective.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing his injuries fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to pre-existing chronic lower back pain and accident-related psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide objective medical evidence of a pre-existing condition that would preclude recovery within the MIG, preferring the respondent's orthopedic assessment.

The Tribunal also accepted the respondent's psychological assessment, finding insufficient evidence of a diagnosable psychological condition.

As the injuries were deemed minor and the MIG limits were exhausted, the proposed treatment plans, an award for unreasonable delay, and interest were denied.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to a non-earner benefit (NEB) and a partially denied treatment plan for psychological services.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet the test for a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as medical evidence and an in-home assessment showed he could continue his pre-accident activities, albeit at a slower pace.

The NEB claim was dismissed.

However, the Tribunal approved the disputed treatment plan for psychological services, preferring the applicant's expert evidence which thoroughly detailed the need for 1.5-hour therapy sessions.

The applicant was awarded the cost of the treatment plan with interest, but his claim for an award under s. 10 of Regulation 664 was dismissed due to lack of evidence of unreasonable delay by the insurer.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including non-earner benefits, medical and rehabilitation benefits, and the cost of assessments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life, dismissing the claim for non-earner benefits.

The Tribunal partially approved treatment plans for physiotherapy and psychological services, finding them reasonable and necessary.

Claims for chiropractic treatment, dental services, replacement eyewear, and various assessments were dismissed due to insufficient evidence or failure to prove they were reasonable and necessary as a result of the accident.