Dr. Teasell

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits, including non-earner benefits and medical benefits for physiotherapy, following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the claims based on insurer's examinations and surveillance evidence showing the applicant working at a nail salon, which contradicted her self-reported limitations.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to prove a complete inability to carry on a normal life and that further physiotherapy was not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for an award and interest were also dismissed.

The defendants in a slip and fall action moved for leave to issue a third party claim against a snow removal contractor.

The motion was brought after the expiry of the limitation period for third party claims.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the defendants were the authors of their own misfortune for the delay.

The court held that the prejudice to the plaintiffs, including the potential for further delay, additional examinations, and the erosion of witness memories, significantly outweighed the interest in avoiding multiple proceedings.

The appellant was injured when improperly stored metal sheets in her apartment building's storage room fell on her leg, eventually leading to fibromyalgia.

A jury found the respondent landlords negligent but apportioned 75% of the fault to the appellant for contributory negligence.

The jury awarded damages, including $41,000 for non-pecuniary damages.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal found the trial judge erred in instructing the jury to use the upper limit (cap) for non-pecuniary damages as a scale.

The Court substituted an award of $80,000 for non-pecuniary damages but upheld the jury's findings on contributory negligence and apportionment of fault.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits (IRBs) from the insurer.

After two years, the insurer transitioned the applicant to loss of earning capacity benefits (LECBs).

The insurer later attempted to argue that the applicant's disability was unrelated to the accident.

The arbitrator held that the insurer was precluded from raising a causation defence because it had paid IRBs to the 104-week mark without protest and had already begun paying LECBs.

The arbitrator determined the applicant's residual earning capacity at various stages, awarding LECBs based on a 30-hour work week initially, and a 20-hour work week after the three-year review.

The arbitrator also awarded supplementary medical expenses and a $3,000 special award for the insurer's unreasonable refusal to fund psychological counselling.

The insurer appealed an arbitrator's decision awarding the insured weekly income benefits beyond the 156-week mark and a $20,000 special award.

The insured had suffered physical and psychological injuries in a severe motor vehicle accident and was unable to continue working.

The Director's Delegate upheld the arbitrator's finding that the insured was continuously prevented from engaging in suitable employment, noting the insurer failed to provide evidence of alternative suitable jobs while the insured adduced substantial medical evidence of disability.

The special award was also confirmed because the insurer unreasonably terminated benefits and disregarded the recommendations of its own medical experts.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle accident and claimed ongoing statutory accident benefits after the insurer terminated them.

The arbitrator found that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a waitress for the first 156 weeks, rejecting the insurer's medical assessments that she could work part-time.

However, the applicant failed to prove she was continuously prevented from engaging in any suitable employment after the 156-week mark, as she was capable of attending school full-time and could perform suitable minimum-wage jobs.

The arbitrator also awarded supplementary rehabilitation benefits for school transportation and alternative therapy.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits, which the insurer terminated after three years.

She applied for arbitration seeking reinstatement of weekly benefits and homemaker services.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant suffered from a significant mobility impairment and chronic pain that justified the reinstatement of 12 hours per week of homemaker services, her disability was not so pervasive as to continuously prevent her from engaging in substantially all of her usual activities.

Therefore, the claim for ongoing weekly benefits was dismissed.

The applicant was awarded her expenses for the arbitration.

The appellant appealed an arbitration order denying her additional weekly income benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The arbitrator had found that the appellant was not substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment, relying on a Functional Capacities Assessment and the opinions of several medical specialists.

On appeal, the Director's Delegate held that the arbitrator's findings were supported by the evidence and declined to interfere with his assessment of the medical reports and witness credibility.

The appeal was dismissed, and no appeal expenses were awarded.