Dr. Jeffrey Mendelsohn

The applicant sought a post-104-week income replacement benefit (IRB) following a motor vehicle accident, which the respondent insurer denied.

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffers a complete inability to engage in any employment for which she is reasonably suited by education, training, or experience, primarily due to chronic pain syndrome and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's expert assessors over the respondent's assessors, noting that the alternate employment roles proposed by the respondent were not comparable in status or wages.

The applicant was awarded the IRB and interest on overdue payments, but her claim for a special award under section 10 of Regulation 664 was dismissed as the insurer's conduct was not found to be unreasonable or vexatious.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to treatment plans beyond the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit due to a concussion and post-concussion syndrome.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he suffered an accident-related concussion warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's expert evidence, which found no neurocognitive impairment, over the applicant's expert evidence, which was deemed contradictory.

The application for the disputed treatment plans, interest, and an award for unreasonable delay was dismissed.