Application for catastrophic impairment designation dismissed due to conflicting and ambiguous evidence from the applicant's own assessors.
The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2015 motor vehicle accident, claiming she sustained a catastrophic impairment (CAT) under Criteria 7 and 8.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the applicant did not meet her burden of proof.
Under Criterion 7, the applicant's own assessors provided conflicting mental and behavioural impairment ratings (40% vs. 34% WPI), and even combining the lower rating with her physical impairment rating did not meet the 55% threshold.
Under Criterion 8, the Tribunal rejected findings of 'at times' Marked impairment as ambiguous and noted unexplained inconsistencies between the applicant's assessors regarding her level of impairment over time.
The applicant's claims for various treatment plans, an award, and interest were also dismissed as she failed to provide submissions or evidence supporting the plans.
OLATOntario Licence Appeal TribunalMar 3, 2026
