Dr. Marciniak

The applicant sought a determination that he sustained a catastrophic impairment as a result of a motor vehicle accident, along with entitlement to various attendant care benefits and treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal evaluated the applicant's impairments under Criterion 7 (Whole Person Impairment) and Criterion 8 (mental and behavioural disorders).

The Tribunal rejected several of the applicant's physical impairment ratings due to a lack of causal evidence and methodological flaws, concluding the applicant did not meet the 55% WPI threshold.

Under Criterion 8, the Tribunal found the applicant had only mild impairments in activities of daily living and social functioning, failing to meet the threshold of three marked or one extreme impairment.

As the applicant was not catastrophically impaired and had exhausted his non-CAT limits, the claims for attendant care and treatment plans were dismissed.

The plaintiff appealed an order of an Associate Judge requiring her to attend in-person defence medical examinations with a physiatrist and a neuropsychologist.

The plaintiff had refused to attend due to fears of contracting COVID-19.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the Associate Judge made no palpable and overriding error in concluding that the in-person examinations were necessary and that the assessment facility's COVID-19 safety protocols were adequate.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following two motor vehicle accidents.

At the outset of the arbitration hearing, the applicant requested a third adjournment to fulfill outstanding production undertakings, while the insurer moved to exclude two medical witnesses and recently served documents due to late disclosure.

The arbitrator denied the adjournment, finding the applicant had failed to make reasonable efforts to comply with production requests over a two-year period.

The arbitrator also ruled the recently served documents inadmissible and excluded the medical witnesses, citing prejudice to the insurer's ability to respond to the case.

The arbitration was stayed pending the applicant's appeal of these preliminary rulings.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received weekly income benefits until the insurer terminated them after 156 weeks.

The applicant sought reinstatement of benefits, while the insurer sought repayment of benefits, arguing that Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability payments should have been deducted from the applicant's gross weekly income.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was not continuously prevented from engaging in a suitable alternative occupation, relying on surveillance video that contradicted the applicant's reported physical limitations.

The arbitrator also held that CPP benefits are non-indemnity payments and therefore not deductible from gross weekly income under the Schedule.

Both the claim for ongoing benefits and the claim for repayment were dismissed.