Dr. Pervez Ali

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor and subject to the $3,500 limit under the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal, claiming his injuries had progressed to chronic pain with functional impairment, warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found that the medical evidence supported a diagnosis of soft tissue injuries falling within the MIG definition.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant failed to demonstrate chronic pain with severe functional impairment or any psychological injury.

As the MIG limit was exhausted, the claims for additional treatment plans and the cost of clinical records were dismissed.

The defendant, State Farm, brought a summary judgment motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for chiropractic treatments and a declaration of entitlement to future medical rehabilitation benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The court found the case appropriate for summary judgment, noting the small amount in question ($4,090) and the availability of expert evidence.

The court concluded that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the proposed chiropractic treatment plan was reasonable and necessary, as expert opinions emphasized active, self-directed rehabilitation over passive treatments.

The motion was allowed, and the plaintiff's claims were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought enhanced statutory accident benefits, claiming she suffered a catastrophic impairment.

The arbitrator found that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment under section 2(1.2)(g) of the Schedule, as she suffered a marked impairment in the area of adaptation due to a major depressive disorder.

The arbitrator preferred the evidence of the applicant's psychological expert over the insurer's expert, noting the former's comprehensive review of medical records and adherence to the AMA Guides.

The applicant was awarded ongoing income replacement benefits, having established a complete inability to engage in suitable employment due to chronic pain and medication side effects.

The arbitrator also awarded housekeeping benefits, specific periods of attendant care benefits, and approved several treatment plans.

A special award of 20% was ordered against the insurer for unreasonably delaying the assessment and payment of pre-104 week attendant care benefits following the applicant's surgery.