Mr. Pritchett

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

The respondent denied several benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant suffered predominantly minor soft-tissue injuries and failed to provide compelling medical evidence of chronic pain or psychological impairments warranting removal from the MIG.

Furthermore, the applicant did not establish a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as she continued to engage in most pre-accident activities, and was therefore not entitled to a non-earner benefit.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought various statutory accident benefits that were denied by the respondent insurer on the basis that his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries fell outside the MIG due to overwhelming evidence of a psychological impairment resulting from the accident.

Consequently, the Tribunal approved treatment and assessment plans for a physiatrist assessment, a neurological assessment, a psychological assessment, and psychological counselling sessions.

However, the Tribunal denied claims for attendant care benefits, an attendant care assessment, assistive devices, and further chiropractic treatments, finding that the applicant was largely independent in his activities of daily living and that facility-based physical therapy was no longer reasonable and necessary.