G. Gronkowska

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

The respondent insurer deemed the injuries to fall within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG), capping benefits at $3,500.

The applicant argued she suffered from chronic pain and psychological injuries that removed her from the MIG.

The Tribunal found the applicant's medical evidence unpersuasive, noting methodological flaws in her expert's chronic pain diagnosis and a lack of psychological testing.

Preferring the respondent's multidisciplinary assessments, the Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the MIG limit.

The appeal was denied.

The applicant, a self-employed locksmith, was injured in a motor vehicle accident in 2000 and received income replacement benefits (IRBs) until the insurer terminated them in 2006.

The applicant sought post-104 week IRBs, arguing he suffered a complete inability to engage in any employment for which he was reasonably suited.

The arbitrator found the applicant credible and accepted that his chronic pain syndrome prevented him from working an eight-hour day on a full-time basis.

The insurer's experts failed to consider whether the applicant could sustain full-time hours in a structured employment setting.

The arbitrator also dismissed the insurer's request to set off alleged past overpayments against future IRBs, as the insurer had not followed the statutory notice and repayment scheme under section 47 of the Schedule.

The applicant was awarded IRBs of $185.00 per week from March 2006 onward.