Dr. S. MacKay

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits for psychological and neurological assessments.

The respondent insurer denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and its $3,500 funding limit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant did not sustain a concussion, psychological injury, or chronic pain as a result of the subject accident, noting that any ongoing symptoms were likely attributable to a subsequent accident.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant sustained a minor injury subject to the MIG, dismissed the claims for the disputed assessment plans, and denied claims for an award and interest.

The applicant sought non-earner benefits and attendant care benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The Tribunal found the applicant failed to meet the test for a non-earner benefit, as she did not provide compelling evidence comparing her pre- and post-accident activities to establish a complete inability to carry on a normal life.

The Tribunal also denied the claim for attendant care benefits because the applicant failed to prove that any such expenses were incurred.

Claims for an award and interest were dismissed, and the respondent's request for costs was denied.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits.

The insurer determined the injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and denied funding for a psychological assessment and physiotherapy treatment.

The Tribunal found that the applicant sustained predominantly minor injuries, relying on the insurer's examination reports which outweighed the applicant's chiropractic assessment.

The Tribunal dismissed the claims for treatment plans as they fell outside the MIG, denied payment for pre-screening invoices because they were incurred prior to submission, and denied interest as no payments were overdue.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical benefits for two chiropractic treatment plans and one psychological treatment plan under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The respondent denied the plans based on insurer's examinations.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the first chiropractic treatment plan reasonable and necessary, noting the applicant's ongoing pain and the physical impairments documented even in the respondent's own medical examination.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for the second chiropractic plan and the psychological plan, finding insufficient evidence of ongoing physical impairment and concluding the applicant had already reached her psychological treatment goals.

The applicant was awarded the cost of the first chiropractic plan plus interest.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle collision and sought statutory accident benefits for chiropractic treatment and a physiatry assessment.

The respondent insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and the $3,500 funding limit had been exhausted.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries, including a partial rotator cuff tear, were minor injuries under the Schedule.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's experts over the applicant's physiatrist, finding no compelling evidence of a pre-existing condition or psychological injury that would preclude recovery within the MIG.

The application was dismissed.