Mr. Campos

The applicant sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant was entitled to funding for physiotherapy, Botox injections, a mental health driving assessment, a virtual social work assessment, a sleep study, an oculo-visual assessment, and prescription medication, as these were reasonable and necessary to treat his accident-related impairments, including a mild traumatic brain injury.

However, claims for a functional cognitive assessment, an attendant care assessment, and occupational therapy were denied because the applicant demonstrated an ability to engage in pre-accident activities and perform necessary tasks independently.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's request for a special award, finding that the insurer reasonably relied on its assessors' opinions.

The applicant sought an income replacement benefit (IRB) of $400 per week following a motor vehicle accident, claiming psychological and physical impairments prevented him from performing his essential tasks as an AutoCAD technician.

The respondent denied the claim, arguing the applicant returned to work immediately, was terminated for being a poor fit, and lacked objective medical evidence of disability.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to provide contemporaneous, objective medical evidence demonstrating a substantial inability to perform his pre-accident employment tasks during the disputed period.

As no benefits were payable, the claim for interest was also dismissed.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle while riding his electric bike, sustaining two fractured ribs.

He sought income replacement benefits (IRBs), medical benefits, and the cost of various assessments from his insurer.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant was not entitled to IRBs because he was not employed, self-employed, or receiving Employment Insurance at the time of the accident, nor had he worked 26 of the 52 weeks prior.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claims for medical benefits and assessments, finding that the applicant's accident-related injuries had substantially resolved by July 2017 and the proposed treatments and assessments were not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for an award under O. Reg. 664 and interest were consequently dismissed.