Dr. Kilian Walsh

The applicant and the insurer both applied to vary previous arbitration decisions based on alleged new evidence.

The applicant sought to vary a decision denying him income replacement, attendant care, and housekeeping benefits, relying on new medical reports and the testimony of an occupational therapist.

The Director's Delegate dismissed the applicant's application, finding that the evidence could have been obtained prior to the original hearing with due diligence and would not have led to a different result, particularly given the applicant's credibility issues and surveillance evidence showing him performing activities he claimed he could not do.

The insurer's application to vary a decision regarding the cost of a treatment plan based on a discount was also dismissed, as the insurer failed to prove the evidence could not have been obtained prior to the hearing.

The applicant sought to vary or revoke an arbitrator's decision denying his claims for income replacement, attendant care, and housekeeping benefits, relying on new medical reports as 'new evidence'.

The Director's Delegate dismissed the application, finding that the proposed evidence could have been obtained prior to the original hearing with due diligence.

Furthermore, the Delegate held that even if admitted, the new evidence would not have led to a different result, as it did not address the arbitrator's core findings regarding the applicant's lack of credibility, failure to prove income loss, and demonstrated functional abilities.

The applicant, who sustained a catastrophic impairment including a traumatic brain injury in a motor vehicle accident, sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer denied several treatment plans for physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech-language therapy, and a multi-disciplinary residential program in the United States.

The arbitrator found that the insurer improperly relied on outdated or flawed assessor reports and failed to give adequate weight to the objective evidence of the applicant's treating professionals.

All disputed treatment plans were found to be reasonable and necessary, and the applicant was awarded the claimed benefits with interest.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed housekeeping benefits, acupuncture treatment, and a special award.

The arbitrator found the applicant was entitled to $3,676 for housekeeping expenses, as she suffered a substantial inability to perform her household tasks for a period following the accident.

The claim for further acupuncture treatment was denied because the medical evidence emphasized regular exercise rather than passive therapies.

The claim for a special award was dismissed as the insurer's denial of benefits was supported by an expert opinion and was not unreasonable.