Dr. Bruni

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought various statutory accident benefits, which the respondent insurer denied.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to a pre-existing low back condition that impacted his recovery.

The Tribunal partially allowed the claim for physiotherapy services, finding two treatment plans reasonable and necessary based on medical evidence that the applicant had not yet reached maximum medical improvement.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for further physiotherapy, functional and medical assessments, transportation costs, and the cost of an OCF-3, as the applicant failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant sought accident benefits following a 2015 motor vehicle accident.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and that he failed to prove chronic pain or psychological impairments that would remove him from the MIG.

However, the Tribunal held that the respondent failed to provide adequate medical and other reasons for denying the treatment plans, violating s. 38(8) of the Schedule.

Applying Ferawana and Zheng, the Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay for the disputed treatment plans, provided they were incurred before proper notice was given.

The claim for interest was denied.

The Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT), acting as litigation guardian for a plaintiff under a disability, brought a motion under Rule 7.08 for court approval of a proposed $45,000 settlement of claims arising from an alleged police assault.

The plaintiff and his family opposed the settlement, arguing he was not under a disability and should proceed to trial.

Following a court-ordered capacity assessment, the court confirmed the plaintiff lacked capacity to instruct counsel and that the PGT had the authority to settle the action.

However, the court found the evidentiary record insufficient to meaningfully assess the reasonableness of the proposed settlement, particularly regarding general and special damages.

The court directed the PGT to provide further medical documentation and adjourned the approval determination.