Dr. Samuel Soriano

The applicant sought post-104 week income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant did not meet the complete inability test.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that she suffered a complete inability to engage in any employment or self-employment for which she was reasonably suited.

The Tribunal noted the applicant's pre-existing health issues and failure to address causation regarding a subsequent accident.

The medical evidence provided did not sufficiently address the complete inability test.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought ongoing income replacement benefits (IRB) after the respondent terminated them.

The adjudicator found that the applicant failed to prove she suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a sales associate, which was categorized as light work.

The evidence showed the applicant had returned to university and briefly worked another part-time job.

The application for IRBs, interest, and a special award was dismissed.

The applicant, who was deemed catastrophically impaired following a motor vehicle accident, sought payment for four physiotherapy treatment plans.

The insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant had reached maximal medical recovery for his musculoskeletal injuries.

The adjudicator preferred the evidence of the insurer's medical examiners, finding that the applicant's pain complaints had a strong non-organic component and that further physiotherapy would not be beneficial.

The adjudicator also found that the insurer's notices of denial were sufficient.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits, which were later terminated by the insurer.

She applied for arbitration seeking ongoing weekly benefits and housekeeping expenses.

The arbitrator found that the applicant failed to prove a substantial inability to perform her essential tasks, noting significant credibility issues, including video surveillance evidence that contradicted her claims of severe physical limitations.

The claims for weekly benefits and housekeeping expenses were dismissed, but the applicant was awarded her hearing expenses.