Asma Malik

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including occupational therapy, home maintenance expenses, and equipment for a web design course.

The Tribunal found the applicant was entitled to the occupational therapy plan, including a treadmill and exercise app, as reasonable and necessary for her mental health recovery.

The Tribunal also approved the computer, printer, and textbook required to complete a previously approved web design course.

However, the Tribunal denied the claim for home maintenance and renovation expenses, finding they were regular property maintenance and not incurred as a result of the accident.

The Applicant was catastrophically injured in a motor vehicle accident, sustaining a traumatic brain injury and chronic pain.

He applied for statutory accident benefits, including non-earner, attendant care, and housekeeping benefits, which the Insurer denied or underpaid.

The Arbitrator found that the Applicant suffered a complete inability to lead a normal life and awarded non-earner benefits.

The Arbitrator also deemed past attendant care and housekeeping expenses to have been incurred under s. 3(8) of the Schedule, finding that the Insurer unreasonably withheld benefits by failing to advise the impecunious and functionally illiterate Applicant that it would pay for professional services.

However, the Arbitrator declined to order a special award, finding the Insurer's conduct was not sufficiently egregious.

Following a finding that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment in a motor vehicle accident, the parties disputed the quantum of arbitration expenses.

The applicant claimed $99,184.04, including a premium for beating an offer to settle.

The arbitrator rejected the claim for a premium, finding no jurisdiction to award it.

Applying a 4:1 ratio for preparation to hearing time, the arbitrator assessed reasonable legal fees and disbursements, ultimately awarding the applicant $28,890.86 inclusive of HST.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed she sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a mental or behavioural disorder.

The insurer argued the accident was minor and her impairments were pre-existing or caused by unrelated post-accident stressors.

Applying the three-stage process from Pastore, the arbitrator found that the accident materially contributed to the applicant's diagnosed mental and behavioural disorders, including major depressive disorder and pain disorder.

The arbitrator preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts and the insurer's occupational therapist over the insurer's psychiatrist, concluding the applicant suffered a marked impairment in the sphere of deterioration or decompensation in work or worklike settings.

The applicant was deemed catastrophically impaired.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits, including caregiver benefits, housekeeping expenses, and the cost of an occupational therapy assessment.

The insurer denied the claims.

At arbitration, the arbitrator found that the applicant did not meet the "substantial inability" test for caregiver or housekeeping benefits, as she had returned to work and caregiving shortly after the accident with only minor residual complaints.

However, the arbitrator ordered the insurer to pay for the occupational therapy assessment, finding it was a reasonable expense and not subject to the conflict of interest disclosure provisions of section 38 of the Schedule.

The applicant's claim for a special award was dismissed.