3 total
Non-earner benefits denied due to improved functionality; chronic pain and functional abilities assessments approved.
The applicant was struck by a vehicle as a pedestrian and sought statutory accident benefits, including non-earner benefits and various medical and rehabilitation treatment plans.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the claim for non-earner benefits, finding that the applicant's functionality had improved and he did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as evidenced by his return to post-secondary education and independence with self-care.
The Tribunal approved treatment plans for a chronic pain assessment and a functional abilities evaluation, finding them reasonable and necessary to investigate ongoing impairments.
The remaining claims for treatment plans and an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.
Application for statutory accident benefits dismissed; proposed treatment and assessments found not reasonable and necessary.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a rear-end motor vehicle collision.
The respondent insurer denied multiple treatment plans for chiropractic care, assistive devices including a tablet and mattress, and various medical assessments.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant's ongoing complaints were attributable to pre-existing degenerative changes rather than the accident.
The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's assessors, concluding that the proposed goods and services were not reasonable and necessary.
Tribunal awards occupational therapy and assistive devices for post-concussion symptoms but denies further passive physical treatments.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule for post-concussion syndrome and physical injuries.
The respondent insurer denied several treatment plans.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant was entitled to an in-home assessment, occupational therapy, a portion of a neuropsychological assessment, and assistive devices, as these were reasonable and necessary to address her cognitive and emotional symptoms.
However, claims for massage therapy, physiotherapy, and a rehabilitation support worker were dismissed because the applicant had reached maximum medical improvement from an orthopedic perspective and passive treatments provided only temporary relief.
No co-appearing lawyers found.
No judges found.