Dr. Karen Hudes

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to an Income Replacement Benefit (IRB) and four treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that while the applicant's physical impairments did not meet the threshold for an IRB, his accident-related psychological impairments, specifically driving anxiety and a specific phobia, caused a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment as a forklift driver.

The Tribunal awarded the IRB and interest on overdue payments, but denied the treatment plans as the applicant failed to prove they were reasonable and necessary.

The applicant sought income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming physical and psychological impairments prevented him from working as a machine operator.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal reviewed medical evidence, including insurer examinations, which indicated the applicant's soft tissue injuries had resolved and his adjustment disorder did not cause a substantial inability to perform his light-duty work.

The Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment during the disputed period.

The applicant sought income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming he was unable to perform his pre-accident work as a self-employed mason.

The adjudicator dismissed the application, finding insufficient contemporaneous medical evidence to prove a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his employment.

The adjudicator noted that functional testing was deemed invalid due to the applicant's sub-maximal effort, and no financial documentation was provided to demonstrate an actual loss of income during the disputed period.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) and medical benefits from his insurer.

The insurer initially paid some benefits but later terminated them, arguing the applicant suffered only minor injuries and was capable of working.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was entitled to IRBs for a limited period from August 2013 to October 2013, as he had returned to work thereafter and failed to prove a complete inability to engage in employment.

The claims for further medical benefits were dismissed because the insurer had already paid the $50,000 policy limit after conceding the applicant's pre-existing condition removed him from the Minor Injury Guideline.

Interest was awarded on benefits that the insurer had delayed paying.