Ms. Pilc

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

The respondent denied the benefits on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove her injuries warranted removal from the MIG, as the medical evidence confirmed only minor soft tissue injuries.

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's expert reports diagnosing chronic pain and psychological impairments, finding them unreliable and unsupported by contemporaneous medical records.

As the MIG limits were exhausted, the application for further medical and rehabilitation benefits was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2013 motor vehicle accident.

The adjudicator found the applicant was entitled to medical benefits for social work counselling and physiotherapy, preferring the evidence of the applicant's assessors and the respondent's own psychological assessor over the respondent's paper-review orthopaedic assessment.

The adjudicator noted the applicant suffered from accident-related psychological impairments and chronic pain.

The claim for the cost of an OCF-3 was denied as it was not requested by the insurer and provided no new medical information.

The respondent's request for costs under Rule 19.1, alleging the applicant's reply was inflammatory, was dismissed as the conduct did not meet the high threshold of being unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, or in bad faith.