Dr. Saadia Ahmad

The applicant, who was 12 years old at the time of the motor vehicle accident, sought statutory accident benefits for physical and psychological impairments.

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

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide sufficient objective medical evidence to establish that he sustained physical or psychological impairments outside the MIG.

Furthermore, the applicant did not prove that his pre-existing cognitive and psychological conditions prevented him from achieving maximal recovery within the MIG limits.

Consequently, the disputed treatment plans for physiotherapy and psychological services were deemed not reasonable and necessary, and no interest was payable.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident in 1998, sustaining a traumatic brain injury.

She applied for arbitration after a dispute with her insurer over the quantum of attendant care benefits.

The applicant claimed she required 24-hour care due to cognitive impairments and safety concerns, while the insurer argued she only required limited assistance.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant suffered from executive functioning impairments caused or exacerbated by the accident, she did not require around-the-clock care.

The arbitrator accepted the insurer's occupational therapist's assessment, awarding attendant care benefits of $649.52 per month, plus interest on overdue payments.