Dr. S. Bhangu

The applicant sought a non-earner benefit following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet his burden of proving a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The medical evidence, including assessments from a physiatrist, psychiatrist, and occupational therapist, did not support the applicant's subjective reporting of his limitations.

The Tribunal also noted credibility concerns regarding the applicant's self-reporting.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle collision and sought non-earner benefits and medical benefits beyond the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit.

The adjudicator found that the applicant did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as she returned to work and maintained independence in daily activities.

Furthermore, the applicant's injuries were predominantly soft-tissue sprains and strains falling within the MIG, and she failed to demonstrate a pre-existing condition or chronic pain that would warrant removal from the MIG framework.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including attendant care benefits, non-earner benefits, medical benefits, and costs of examinations.

The Tribunal dismissed all claims.

The claim for attendant care benefits was denied as surveillance and the applicant's own statements showed he was independent in personal care.

The non-earner benefits claim was denied because the applicant failed to submit a Disability Certificate until the hearing.

The medical benefits and examination costs were denied as not reasonable and necessary, lacking sufficient medical evidence to support them.

The respondent's request for costs was also denied.