Rachel Yeboah

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident when a car ran over his foot, causing a crush injury.

He sought post-104 week income replacement benefits, attendant care benefits, and various medical and rehabilitation benefits.

The Tribunal found the applicant was not entitled to post-104 week IRBs as he failed to prove a complete inability to engage in suitable employment.

Claims for attendant care benefits were dismissed because the applicant was largely independent and failed to prove his mother sustained an economic loss.

The Tribunal approved some treatment plans for assistive devices and physiotherapy, finding them reasonable and necessary, but denied others due to lack of contemporaneous medical evidence or failure to submit prior approval.

The claim for a special award was dismissed.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle while pushing her infant in a grocery cart and sought a determination of catastrophic impairment due to psychological injuries, along with ongoing Income Replacement Benefits (IRBs) and medical benefits.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant suffered a mental or behavioural disorder caused by the accident, her impairments were moderate rather than marked, and thus she did not meet the catastrophic impairment threshold.

However, the Tribunal granted the applicant's claim for post-104 week IRBs, finding she suffered a complete inability to engage in suitable employment based on vocational and psychological assessments.

Claims for specific physiotherapy and chiropractic treatment plans were dismissed for lack of evidence, though the insurer was ordered to pay HST on an approved psychological treatment plan.

A claim for a special award was dismissed.