Dr. C. Vigna

The appellant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits for two years until the insurer terminated them, arguing she did not meet the 'any occupation' test.

At arbitration, the Arbitrator ordered benefits reinstated but only until September 2000, inferring from a psychiatrist's report that the appellant could perform some work.

On appeal, the Director's Delegate found the Arbitrator erred in law by drawing an inference that was not supported by the evidence, as the psychiatrist's report did not recommend a work trial but merely suggested one to prove his unqualified opinion that she was completely disabled.

The appeal was allowed and the issue of entitlement to benefits was remitted to a new arbitration hearing.

The applicant, a 52-year-old bricklayer with limited English skills, was injured in a motor vehicle accident.

He applied for statutory accident benefits, claiming ongoing weekly income benefits beyond the 156-week mark, care benefits, and a special award.

The insurer argued he was capable of performing alternative sedentary work.

The arbitrator found that the applicant suffered from a combination of musculoskeletal injuries, mild brain injury, and psychological impairments that rendered him competitively unemployable.

The arbitrator awarded ongoing weekly income benefits and care benefits for the assistance provided by his family, but denied the claim for a special award.