Dr. Andrej Gwardjan

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

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

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on chronic pain and psychological injuries.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove chronic pain with a functional limitation.

Regarding psychological injuries, the Tribunal preferred the respondent's expert evidence, which relied on objective testing, over the applicant's expert, who used primarily subjective self-reporting tools.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was held to the MIG.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to treatment beyond the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and a non-earner benefit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that his chronic pain, psychological impairments, or pre-existing conditions warranted removal from the MIG.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the disputed treatment plan for physiotherapy was not payable.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for a non-earner benefit, finding insufficient evidence to establish that the applicant suffered a complete inability to carry on a normal life.