Dr. Seung-Jun Lee

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming his injuries fell outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to pre-existing conditions, psychological impairments, and chronic pain.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence of pre-existing conditions or psychological injuries that would prevent maximal recovery within the MIG limits.

The Tribunal preferred the insurer's medical examinations, which concluded the injuries were minor soft tissue strains.

As the applicant's injuries were deemed minor and the $3,500 MIG limit was exhausted, the claims for additional physiotherapy and orthopaedic assessments were dismissed.

The applicant sought entitlement to statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, specifically claiming costs for a chronic pain assessment and a chronic pain program.

The Tribunal found that the treatment plans were not reasonable and necessary, preferring the recent insurer's examination report over the applicant's older medical report.

The Tribunal noted the applicant was fully functional, working full-time, and had not utilized previously approved treatment.

The application was dismissed, and claims for interest and a special award were denied.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought payment for various medical and rehabilitation benefits, including chiropractic, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, a brain SPECT scan, an EMG assessment, and cognitive devices.

The respondent insurer denied the treatment plans on the basis that they were not reasonable and necessary.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to meet his burden of proof.

The Tribunal afforded little weight to the applicant's medical experts due to factual inaccuracies in their reports and relied on the respondent's assessors, who concluded the applicant had reached maximum medical improvement and that the proposed treatments were not medically justified.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including a determination of catastrophic impairment due to a mental or behavioural disorder.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's psychological impairments pre-dated the accident.

The Tribunal found that the accident exacerbated the applicant's pre-existing condition, resulting in a marked class 4 impairment in her adaption to the workplace.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant was catastrophically impaired and awarded attendant care benefits of $931.57 per month, along with partial entitlement to claimed medical, rehabilitation, and examination expenses.

The applicant sought medical benefits for chiropractic services and a psychological assessment following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the chiropractic treatment plans on the basis that they were not reasonable and necessary, and the applicant sought an award for delayed payment of the psychological assessment.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove the chiropractic treatments were reasonable and necessary, relying on the respondent's independent medical examination and the lack of support in the treating physician's records.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for an award, finding the respondent did not unreasonably delay approving the psychological assessment.

The applicant sought medical benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit, which had been exhausted.

The applicant claimed removal from the MIG based on psychological impairments and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a psychological impairment or chronic pain, noting the applicant's post-accident life and functional capacity remained largely unchanged.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were minor and fell within the MIG.

Claims for an award and costs were also dismissed.