Dr. D. Louvish

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle accident.

The respondent insurer denied various treatment plans and income replacement benefits (IRBs), arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant's injuries were minor, rejecting reports of psychological impairment and chronic pain due to inconsistencies and suspected malingering.

The Tribunal preferred the insurer's medical examinations, concluding the applicant was subject to the $3,500 MIG limit and not entitled to the disputed medical benefits.

The claim for IRBs was also dismissed as the applicant failed to prove an inability to perform essential tasks and did not disclose post-accident income.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits from the respondent insurer.

The respondent denied several treatment plans for chiropractic and psychological services.

The Tribunal found that the chiropractic treatment plans were reasonable and necessary to address the applicant's chronic pain, relying on the clinical notes of the applicant's family physician.

However, the Tribunal denied the psychological treatment plans because the applicant failed to provide evidence justifying the proposed hourly rates and the costs of the psychological materials.

The Tribunal also dismissed the applicant's claim for a special award, finding no evidence that the respondent unreasonably withheld or delayed benefits.

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

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

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove he suffered from a pre-existing condition, psychological injury, or chronic pain condition that would remove him from the MIG.

Relying on insurer's examinations and the lack of consistent medical complaints, the adjudicator concluded the injuries were predominantly minor.

The application for disputed benefits and interest was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing her injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant's physical injuries were minor and unrelated to the accident, preferring the respondent's medical evidence.

The Tribunal also rejected the applicant's psychological claims, noting inconsistencies, lack of a translator during assessment, and absence of psychological issues in clinical notes.

As the applicant's injuries were deemed minor and the $3,500 MIG limit was exhausted, all disputed treatment plans, interest, and a section 10 award were denied.

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

The respondent denied the benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the doctrine of res judicata applied, as a previous Tribunal decision had already determined the applicant's injuries were minor.

The applicant failed to provide fresh evidence that would conclusively impeach the original results or demonstrate a deterioration in his condition.

Consequently, the application for benefits, an award, and interest was dismissed.

The respondent's request for costs was also denied.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on chronic pain, relying on a consultation report.

The Tribunal gave limited weight to that report, preferring the evidence of the applicant's treating pain management physician, who did not diagnose Chronic Pain Syndrome.

The Tribunal found the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor.

As the $3,500 MIG limit was exhausted, the claims for treatment plans were dismissed.

The claim for a non-earner benefit was also dismissed as the applicant failed to demonstrate a complete inability to carry on a normal life.