M. Fang

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for psychological treatment and catastrophic impairment assessments following a 2018 motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application.

The claim for psychological treatment was barred by res judicata, having been denied in a previous Tribunal decision.

The claim for catastrophic assessments was denied because the applicant failed to demonstrate that her pre-existing osteoarthritis or psychological symptoms were exacerbated by or directly related to the accident, relying instead on self-reported assessments that contradicted her family physician's contemporaneous records.

The Applicant sought income replacement benefits (IRBs) following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the Applicant failed to prove she suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.

The Tribunal noted the lack of evidence regarding her essential work tasks and found the medical evidence, including an occupational therapy report lacking objective functional assessments, insufficient to establish a disabling impairment.

Claims for a Regulation 664 award and interest were consequently dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied certain benefits, including a psychological assessment and treatment plans, on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and the $3,500 limit had been exhausted.

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG due to chronic pain and psychological impairment.

The Tribunal found insufficient medical evidence to support chronic pain, noting the family physician's records did not contain such a diagnosis.

The Tribunal also gave little weight to the applicant's psychological assessment, as the assessors did not review the family physician's clinical notes, which showed no post-accident psychological complaints.

The Tribunal concluded the injuries were predominantly minor, the MIG applied, and dismissed the application for the disputed benefits.