Inderneet Arora

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident where he was a passenger in a vehicle that struck a pole, resulting in a traumatic brain injury.

The respondent denied benefits, arguing the applicant was excluded under s. 31(1)(c) of the Schedule because he knew or ought to have known the driver lacked the owner's consent.

The Tribunal found the respondent failed to meet its burden to prove the exclusion applied.

The Tribunal awarded the applicant a non-earner benefit for a closed period, finding he suffered a complete inability to carry on a normal life until October 2020.

Claims for housekeeping benefits, a physiotherapy treatment plan, and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant sought various statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, having previously been deemed to have sustained a catastrophic impairment.

The respondent argued the applicant was statute-barred from disputing the denial of attendant care benefits because he failed to do so within the two-year limitation period.

Applying the discoverability principles from Tomec, the Tribunal found the limitation period did not apply because the applicant could not have successfully disputed the denial until he had evidence of his catastrophic impairment.

The Tribunal partially granted the applicant's claims for treatment plans, including physiotherapy, psychological treatment, and catastrophic assessments, while denying mileage expenses for service providers.

The Tribunal also awarded attendant care benefits at reduced monthly amounts for specific periods, finding the applicant did not require 24/7 supervision.