Dr. Braganza

The applicant sought a determination that she sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a mental or behavioural disorder following a motor vehicle accident.

The adjudicator applied the three-step approach from Pastore and found that while the accident caused a mental or behavioural disorder, the impact on the applicant's life was limited.

Preferring the respondent's medical experts who noted symptom exaggeration and validity concerns, the adjudicator concluded the applicant was only mildly impaired and did not meet the threshold for catastrophic impairment.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming catastrophic impairment due to mental and behavioural disorders, non-earner benefits, and attendant care benefits.

The arbitrator dismissed all claims, finding that the applicant was malingering.

The arbitrator rejected the applicant's expert evidence due to flawed methodology and inconsistencies, preferring the insurer's expert and surveillance evidence which showed the applicant engaging in normal daily activities.

The arbitrator also found the accident involved minor forces comparable to everyday activities, making the claimed severe impairments implausible.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits.

The parties settled all issues except expenses shortly before the arbitration hearing.

The arbitrator determined that the applicant was entitled to expenses under section 282(11) of the Insurance Act.

The arbitrator awarded $1,200 for legal fees, $3,500 for expert reports (allowing the reports of Dr. Jha and Dr. Braganza but rejecting a second report by Dr. Waxer as duplicative), and $1,150 for disbursements, for a total expense award of $5,850.