Dr. Natasha Browne

The applicant sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) and a determination of catastrophic impairment following a motor vehicle accident.

The central factual dispute was whether the applicant's blackouts were caused by the accident or were a pre-existing condition.

The Tribunal found that the blackouts were a symptom of accident-related PTSD, which was exacerbated by a subsequent near-miss incident.

The Tribunal awarded pre-104 week IRBs, finding the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident employment tasks.

However, post-104 week IRBs were denied as the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to engage in suitable alternative employment.

The Tribunal also concluded that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a Class 4 marked psychological impairment affecting her activities of daily living and adaptation.

The applicant sought reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision denying her claim for an income replacement benefit following a motor vehicle accident.

The applicant argued that the Tribunal misapplied the test for eligibility, failed to state the standard of proof, and improperly considered certain evidence.

The Executive Chair dismissed the request for reconsideration, finding that the Tribunal correctly concluded the applicant was not working due to a temporary layoff rather than a substantial inability to perform her pre-accident employment.

The Chair also found no error in the Tribunal's application of the standard of proof or its treatment of the evidence.