Dr. Joel Goldberg

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).

As a preliminary issue, the respondent argued the application was barred by res judicata because a previous Tribunal decision had already determined the applicant was subject to the MIG.

The adjudicator found res judicata did not apply because the previous decision addressed whether the applicant had a pre-existing condition, whereas the current application argued for removal from the MIG based on chronic pain and psychological impairment.

On the substantive issues, the adjudicator found the applicant's chronic neck pain and headaches pre-dated the accident and her psychological complaints were related to this pre-existing pain.

Consequently, the applicant's injuries were deemed predominantly minor, and she was not entitled to the disputed treatment plan or an award.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed she sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a mental or behavioural disorder.

The insurer argued the accident was minor and her impairments were pre-existing or caused by unrelated post-accident stressors.

Applying the three-stage process from Pastore, the arbitrator found that the accident materially contributed to the applicant's diagnosed mental and behavioural disorders, including major depressive disorder and pain disorder.

The arbitrator preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts and the insurer's occupational therapist over the insurer's psychiatrist, concluding the applicant suffered a marked impairment in the sphere of deterioration or decompensation in work or worklike settings.

The applicant was deemed catastrophically impaired.