Dr. Ernest Hew

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

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

The applicant sought removal from the MIG on the basis of chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found that while there was evidence of accident-related chronic pain, the applicant failed to demonstrate a functional impairment.

Furthermore, the Tribunal preferred the respondent's psychological assessment over the applicant's, noting a lack of corroboration in the family doctor's clinical notes.

Consequently, the Tribunal held the applicant was subject to the MIG, dismissing the claims for treatment plans, interest, and a section 10 award.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the respondent's determination that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued he suffered from chronic pain and an adjustment disorder, relying on brief reports from his treating physicians.

The Tribunal preferred the detailed reports of the respondent's medical assessors, finding insufficient evidence of chronic pain or psychological impairment.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the MIG limit.

As the applicant had exhausted the MIG limit, the disputed treatment plans were denied.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for a non-earner benefit, finding the applicant returned to full-time work shortly after the accident and did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life.