Dr. Alisa Naiman

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

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor, noting a lack of objective medical evidence supporting functional impairment or psychological disability.

The Tribunal relied on independent medical examinations and the applicant's own family physician records, which did not substantiate the claimed impairments.

As the applicant was confined to the MIG limits, the claims for additional treatment plans, interest, and a punitive award were dismissed.

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

The respondent denied several treatment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant suffered an accident-related psychological impairment, warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal approved a $2,200 psychological assessment as reasonable and necessary.

However, claims for a $6,447.13 psychological counselling plan and a $3,770.16 physiotherapy plan were dismissed due to insufficient evidence of how treatment goals would be met and a documented lack of therapeutic effectiveness, respectively.

Interest was awarded on the approved assessment plan.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued that pre-existing conditions, including cervical radiculopathy and carpal tunnel syndrome, prevented her recovery within the MIG framework.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had documented pre-existing conditions, there was no medical evidence demonstrating that these conditions precluded her recovery within the MIG.

Consequently, the applicant's impairments were deemed predominantly minor, and her claims for a physiotherapy treatment plan, a psychological assessment, and interest were dismissed.

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

The respondent denied several treatment plans and assessments, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant claimed to have suffered a finger fracture and psychological impairments that warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence that the finger fracture was caused by the accident and preferred the respondent's psychological assessment, which found no clinically significant psychological impairment.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the $3,500 MIG limit.

The disputed treatment plans for physiotherapy, psychological assessment, and orthopaedic assessment were denied as the applicant failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant also claimed entitlement to an income replacement benefit (IRB) and two treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries were minor and that he failed to establish a pre-existing psychological condition that would preclude recovery within the MIG.

The Tribunal also dismissed the IRB claim, noting the applicant failed to provide evidence of his pre-accident employment tasks and was found functionally capable of working by the insurer's assessors.

The claims for treatment plans and interest were similarly dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing his physical and psychological impairments, along with pre-existing conditions, warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The respondent denied the benefits, maintaining the injuries were minor.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of non-minor physical or psychological impairments, or that pre-existing conditions precluded his recovery within the MIG.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the claims for additional treatment plans, interest, and an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming her injuries warranted treatment outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain, psychological issues, and exacerbation of a pre-existing condition.

The insurer denied the disputed treatment plans, arguing the injuries were predominantly minor.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet her burden of proving her injuries fell outside the MIG, preferring the insurer's medical examination reports over the applicant's unsupported treatment plans.

As the $3,500 MIG limit had been exhausted, the application for the disputed treatment plans and interest was dismissed.

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

The respondent denied treatment plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that she should be removed from the MIG due to pre-existing conditions, chronic pain, or psychological impairments.

However, the Tribunal found that the respondent's initial denial of a psychological treatment plan was non-compliant with section 38(8) of the Schedule.

As a result, the respondent was prohibited from relying on the MIG for that specific treatment plan until a compliant notice was issued.

The applicant was awarded the incurred costs for psychological services during the period of non-compliance, but her other claims for chiropractic treatment, a psychological assessment, and an award under Regulation 664 were dismissed.

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

The insurer denied funding for additional chiropractic treatments and assessments beyond the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's physical and psychological injuries fell within the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the insurer's medical experts, who provided extensive reports based on testing, over the applicant's practitioners, who failed to provide details of testing or lacked appropriate accreditation.

As the applicant had already exhausted the MIG funding limit, the claims for additional medical benefits and interest were dismissed.