Irene Vrckovnik

The defendant insurer brought a motion seeking two defence medical examinations by an orthopedic specialist and an occupational therapist and production of the clinical notes and records underlying two expert reports recently served by the plaintiff.

The action arose from a 1994 motor vehicle accident and a dispute over termination of statutory accident benefits.

The court held that the defendant had previously obtained numerous medical assessments and had set the matter down for trial, indicating readiness to proceed on the existing evidence.

In the absence of evidence demonstrating a substantial and unexpected change in circumstances, the defendant failed to meet the threshold required to reopen interlocutory steps.

The request for production of underlying clinical notes and records was also rejected.

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

The arbitrator found that the insurer's notices terminating income replacement benefits were not clear and unequivocal, meaning the limitation period had not expired.

The arbitrator determined the applicant was an employee rather than self-employed at the time of the accident.

The applicant was awarded 24-hour attendant care benefits retroactive to the accident date due to severe cognitive and behavioural impairments, despite a delay in submitting the formal application.

The arbitrator also awarded housekeeping benefits, nutritional counselling, and medical benefits for the purchase of medical marijuana, finding that marijuana was not an experimental treatment in the specific circumstances of the applicant's brain injury and chronic pain.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle and sustained serious injuries, including a fractured pelvis.

She applied for statutory accident benefits for acupuncture, housekeeping, transportation, and a treadmill.

The insurer terminated payments for these benefits.

The arbitrator found that the acupuncture treatments provided necessary pain relief and that the applicant required ongoing housekeeping and transportation assistance due to her physical limitations.

The claims for acupuncture, housekeeping, and transportation were granted, while the claim for a treadmill was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.

The arbitrator declined to make a special award, finding the insurer's conduct was not unreasonable.