3 total
Chronic pain assessment approved but chiropractic treatment denied for applicant injured in rear-end collision.
The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle collision and sought statutory accident benefits for chiropractic treatment and a chronic pain assessment.
The respondent denied the benefits, arguing they were not reasonable and necessary, and raised a causation issue due to a subsequent accident.
The adjudicator found that the subject accident was a necessary cause of the applicant's impairments.
The adjudicator denied the chiropractic treatment plan, finding insufficient evidence that it was providing therapeutic benefit given the applicant's full range of motion.
However, the adjudicator approved the chronic pain assessment, finding a reasonable possibility that the applicant suffers from chronic pain based on ongoing sprain and strain diagnoses.
The applicant's request for an award for delayed payment was dismissed.
Applicant's injuries found to fall within the Minor Injury Guideline; claims for psychological assessment dismissed.
The applicant sought medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing his injuries fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain, pre-existing injuries, and psychological issues.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proving his injuries fell outside the MIG.
The medical evidence did not support a finding of chronic pain under the AMA criteria, nor did it establish a significant psychological impairment or that a pre-existing condition prevented maximal recovery.
Consequently, the claims for a psychological assessment, interest, and a special award were dismissed.
Attendant care benefits denied because family member provider did not sustain an economic loss.
The applicant was injured in a motorcycle accident and claimed attendant care benefits for services provided by his wife.
The insurer denied payment because the wife, a retired nurse, did not provide the services in the course of her employment and did not sustain an economic loss.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal agreed, finding that the applicant failed to prove an economic loss as required by the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
The Tribunal also found the claimed amounts excessive and unsupported by the evidence, and dismissed claims for a special award and interest.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.