Mitchell Spivak

The union filed multiple grievances alleging that the grievor was subjected to harassment, discrimination, a poisoned work environment, and reprisal by her co-workers and management at the Ministry of Transportation following a health reassignment.

The grievor sought $10 million in damages.

The arbitrator dismissed the grievances, relying on extensive medical evidence from multiple Independent Medical Examinations which concluded that the grievor suffered from a psychiatric impairment characterized by paranoid delusions and a persecution complex.

The arbitrator found that the grievor's perceptions of harassment were fundamentally compromised by her medical condition and that the employer had acted reasonably and appropriately in investigating her complaints and managing her accommodation.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and subsequently developed complete hearing loss in his left ear and partial hearing loss in his right ear due to a labyrinthine concussion.

He applied for non-earner benefits, housekeeping benefits, and a determination of catastrophic impairment.

The arbitrator found that the applicant's hearing loss and resulting psychological impairments continuously prevented him from engaging in substantially all of his pre-accident activities, entitling him to non-earner benefits.

The arbitrator also concluded that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment under criterion (g) of the Schedule, as his psychological impairments resulted in a Class 4 marked impairment in the sphere of social functioning.

The claim for housekeeping benefits was dismissed.

The insurer was ordered to pay the applicant's arbitration expenses.

The appellant was injured in a motorcycle accident and sought a determination of catastrophic impairment.

The arbitrator found the appellant had a 49% Whole Person Impairment (WPI) by only considering physical neurological impairments and excluding psychological impairments to avoid double counting.

On appeal, the Director's Delegate held that the arbitrator erred in law by failing to combine the physical and psychological impairments.

When combined, the WPI totaled 59%, exceeding the 55% threshold.

The appeal was allowed in part, declaring the appellant catastrophically impaired, while upholding the denial of attendant care benefits and a special award.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits, including a determination of catastrophic impairment, income replacement benefits, and medical benefits.

The arbitrator found that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment due to a marked impairment in the adaptation domain (deterioration or decompensation in a work-like setting) under the AMA Guides.

The applicant was awarded ongoing income replacement benefits of $400 per week, as she suffered a complete inability to engage in any employment for which she was reasonably suited.

Claims for various medical benefits and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant's request for an anonymity order was also denied.

The applicant was injured in a motorcycle accident and sought a determination that he sustained a catastrophic impairment, along with claims for attendant care benefits and a special award.

The arbitrator evaluated competing medical assessments and preferred the insurer's experts, finding the applicant's combined physical and psychological impairments amounted to 49% Whole Person Impairment, falling short of the 55% threshold.

The claim for attendant care benefits was dismissed as the applicant failed to demonstrate an economic loss incurred by his wife and medical assessments indicated he was independent in self-care.

The request for a special award was denied because the insurer had not unreasonably withheld benefits.

The applicant was ordered to pay the insurer's hearing expenses.

The Insurer brought a motion for an order staying the arbitration proceedings pending the Applicant's attendance at a new psychiatric examination with Dr. Wiesenthal.

The Applicant had previously attended insurer examinations, but subsequently submitted a new OCF-19 claiming catastrophic impairment under Criterion 8 (mental or behavioural disorder), supported by new assessments.

The Arbitrator found that the proposed examination was reasonably necessary given the new information and the passage of time.

The Arbitrator ordered that if the Applicant failed to attend the examination by March 1, 2016, the proceedings would be stayed.