Dr. Nagib Yahya Ramadan Yahmad

The applicant sought a determination of catastrophic impairment following a 2016 motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found the applicant did not meet the 55% whole person impairment threshold under Criterion 7, as his combined physical and psychological impairments totaled 42%.

However, the Tribunal concluded the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment under Criterion 8, finding marked impairments in three domains: social functioning, activities of daily living, and adaptation.

The Tribunal largely preferred the evidence of the applicant's neuropsychologist and mother over the insurer's assessors.

The applicant's request for costs due to alleged spoilage of evidence was denied.

The applicant sought a determination that she sustained a catastrophic impairment as a result of a 2018 motor vehicle accident, along with entitlement to a physiotherapy treatment plan, an award, and interest.

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove she met the criteria for catastrophic impairment under Criteria 6 (physical), 7 (combined physical and psychological), or 8 (mental/behavioural).

The adjudicator rejected the applicant's expert evidence, finding it inconsistent with the AMA Guides and unsupported by objective medical evidence.

The claim for the physiotherapy treatment plan was also dismissed as the applicant failed to include the plan in evidence or prove it was reasonable and necessary.

Consequently, the claims for an award and interest were dismissed.