Dr. Jose Guerra

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to treatment plans for chiropractic services, a psychological assessment, and a chronic pain assessment.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove her chronic pain and psychological impairments were accident-related or severe enough to warrant removal from the MIG.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the claims for treatment plans, a section 10 award, and interest were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including post-104-week income replacement benefits (IRBs), attendant care benefits, and funding for medical assessments.

The Tribunal found the applicant was entitled to ongoing IRBs, as her post-concussion syndrome and chronic pain resulted in a complete inability to engage in any employment for which she was reasonably suited.

The Tribunal also approved a neuropsychological assessment but denied a speech language pathology assessment, noting the applicant's post-accident public speaking engagements.

Claims for attendant care benefits, a special award, and costs were dismissed.

The applicant, a convenience store owner and cashier, sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent insurer terminated the benefits after eight months.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove she suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.

Medical evidence, including insurer examinations, indicated she retained reasonable physical function and her essential tasks were primarily administrative or light physical work.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought income replacement benefits and medical benefits for chiropractic services following a motor vehicle accident.

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove he was employed at the time of the accident or that he suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment, noting his continued participation in physical sports and lack of business documentation.

The adjudicator also dismissed the claims for medical benefits, relying on an insurer's examination report indicating that maximum medical recovery had been achieved and finding insufficient evidence that further chiropractic treatments were reasonable and necessary.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including attendant care benefits, an orthopaedic assessment, assistive devices, and occupational therapy services.

The adjudicator dismissed the application, finding that the applicant was independent with his activities of daily living and failed to establish any economic loss for attendant care.

The adjudicator also found that the requested medical benefits and assistive devices were not reasonable and necessary, preferring the respondent's medical evidence over the applicant's contradictory and incomplete reports.