Dr. Mahvash Elmpak

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the treatment plans on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on an exacerbation of pre-existing lower back pain and psychological injuries.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a pre-existing condition that would preclude recovery within the MIG.

Furthermore, the Tribunal preferred the respondent's psychological assessment over the applicant's, finding no accident-related psychological impairment.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was found not entitled to the disputed benefits, interest, or an award.

The applicant sought non-earner benefits and funding for two chiropractic treatment plans following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found the applicant did not meet the test for non-earner benefits, as medical assessments demonstrated her daily routine remained largely unchanged and her impairments were largely attributable to pre-existing musculoskeletal conditions.

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over the first treatment plan because it was not properly submitted or denied.

The second treatment plan was denied because the applicant failed to provide objective medical evidence that the treatment was reasonable and necessary for accident-related injuries.

The application was dismissed.