Dr. Robert Ogilvie

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including income replacement and medical benefits.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was substantially disabled from his pre-accident employment as a vacuum installer due to an exacerbation of a pre-existing back condition, entitling him to income replacement benefits for the 104-week period.

However, he did not meet the test for a complete inability to engage in any employment thereafter.

The arbitrator also awarded partial medical benefits, noting the insurer failed to comply with the Schedule's procedures for denying treatment plans, but denied other medical benefits as not reasonable or necessary.

Interest and arbitration expenses were awarded to the applicant.

The applicant, a pedestrian whose foot was run over by a car, sought weekly no-fault benefits after the insurer terminated them.

During the arbitration, the insurer attempted to introduce undisclosed surveillance video to impeach the applicant's credibility.

The arbitrator excluded the video, applying the rule in Browne v. Dunn, because the insurer failed to put the evidence to the applicant during cross-examination, which would cause undue prejudice and delay in an arbitration context.

On the merits, the arbitrator found that while the applicant suffered discomfort from his injuries, he failed to establish a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks.

The application for weekly benefits and interest was dismissed.