Dr. Grace Gronkowska

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit, medical benefits for physiotherapy, and the cost of a chronic pain assessment following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal first allowed the applicant's late-filed medical evidence due to an administrative error.

On the substantive issues, the Tribunal found the applicant was not entitled to the non-earner benefit because he failed to provide a comparison of his pre- and post-accident activities.

The physiotherapy treatment plan was denied as the applicant failed to meet his evidentiary burden and the respondent's medical evidence indicated he had reached maximum medical recovery.

However, the Tribunal granted the cost of the chronic pain assessment, preferring the evidence of the applicant's chronic pain specialist over the respondent's orthopaedic surgeon.

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

The respondent denied certain medical benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries were minor and that she failed to establish chronic pain or an accident-related psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the disputed treatment plans were not payable.

Claims for an award and interest were also dismissed.

The applicant sought medical benefits for chronic pain assessments and programs following a rear-end motor vehicle accident.

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

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue injuries and that she failed to establish that her chronic pain or pre-existing psychological condition warranted removal from the MIG.

As the requested treatment plans exceeded the remaining MIG funding limit, they were not payable, and the application was dismissed.