Dr. Mark D’Souza

The defendants brought a motion to adjourn the trial of a slip and fall action scheduled for March 2026.

The plaintiff, who claimed damages for chronic pain syndrome, failed to produce approximately 400 pages of medical records and update her oral discovery answers until weeks before trial.

The court found that the plaintiff breached her discovery obligations under the Rules of Civil Procedure.

To ensure trial fairness and allow the defendants to respond to the new evidence, the court granted the adjournment.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a $1,954.30 physiotherapy treatment plan.

The respondent denied the treatment 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 a psychological impairment and post-concussion syndrome.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient medical evidence to establish an accident-related psychological impairment or concussion.

The adjudicator accepted the respondent's section 44 assessment and hospital records indicating minor physical injuries.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant remains subject to the MIG.

The applicant sought accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing that a pre-existing neck condition warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant's medical evidence, consisting primarily of a checkmark on a faxed note from his family physician, insufficient to prove the pre-existing condition precluded recovery within the MIG.

Relying on a comprehensive independent medical examination, the Tribunal concluded the injuries remained predominantly minor.

The claims for a physiotherapy treatment plan, an award for unreasonable delay, and interest were dismissed.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued she suffered from psychological impairments and chronic pain that warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling evidence of an accident-related psychological impairment or functional impairment resulting from chronic pain.

Consequently, the applicant's injuries were deemed predominantly minor, and she was not entitled to the disputed physiotherapy treatment plan or interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing he should be removed from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant failed to establish functional impairment from chronic pain, noting that his own expert's examination produced normal results.

The Tribunal also rejected the claim of psychological impairment, finding the psychological diagnosis relied too heavily on self-reports and lacked corroboration from the applicant's family physician.

As the applicant remained within the MIG and the limits were exhausted, the claims for treatment plans and an award were dismissed.

The applicant sought medical and rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing his physical and psychological injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found no medical evidence linking his subsequent diagnoses of anxiety, depression, and bipolar disorder to the accident, noting they arose from personal and pandemic-related stressors.

Relying on insurer examinations that found no residual physical impairment or accident-related psychological injury, the Tribunal concluded the applicant failed to prove his injuries fell outside the MIG.

The application for treatment plans and interest was dismissed.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish that she suffered from chronic pain, neurological/cognitive deficits, or psychological impairments caused by the accident that would warrant removal from the MIG.

As the $3,500 MIG limit had already been exhausted, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for additional psychological and physiotherapy treatment plans, as well as the claim for interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including a determination of catastrophic impairment and non-earner benefits.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the claim for non-earner benefits was statute-barred due to the applicant's failure to submit an OCF-3 within 104 weeks of the accident.

The Tribunal also concluded the applicant did not sustain a catastrophic impairment, preferring the respondent's psychiatric assessment over the applicant's, noting the applicant's assessor failed to consider a pre-existing ADHD diagnosis.

Claims for various treatment plans and expenses were dismissed for lack of evidence establishing reasonableness and necessity.

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

The respondent denied a treatment plan for a chronic pain assessment, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove she suffered from chronic pain syndrome or a pre-existing condition that would remove her from the MIG.

However, the Tribunal held that the respondent's denial letter failed to provide adequate medical and other reasons as required by s. 38(8) of the Schedule, as it merely referred to an unspecified 'list of injuries'.

Consequently, under s. 38(11)2, the treatment plan was payable regardless of the MIG limits.

The applicant was awarded $2,460.00 for the assessment plus interest.