The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to various treatment plans and assessments outside the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor soft-tissue injuries.

The Tribunal preferred the respondent's medical assessments, noting that the applicant's contemporaneous medical records did not support a concussion, chronic pain with functional impairment, or a psychological condition.

As the applicant remained within the MIG, the disputed treatment plans were not payable, and claims for interest and a special award were dismissed.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident and subsequently developed a severe neurocognitive disorder, rendering her incapable of caring for herself.

She sought statutory accident benefits, including a determination of catastrophic impairment, income replacement benefits, and attendant care benefits.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's dementia pre-dated the accident and was not caused by it.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the accident materially contributed to the onset and rapid acceleration of the applicant's neurocognitive disorder.

The Tribunal held that the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment under criterion 8 (mental and behavioural impairment) and awarded income replacement benefits, attendant care benefits up to $6,000 per month, and specific medical treatment plans, along with interest.

Claims for an award under section 10 and costs were dismissed.

The applicant was struck by a vehicle as a pedestrian and sought statutory accident benefits, including non-earner benefits and various medical and rehabilitation treatment plans.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the claim for non-earner benefits, finding that the applicant's functionality had improved and he did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life, as evidenced by his return to post-secondary education and independence with self-care.

The Tribunal approved treatment plans for a chronic pain assessment and a functional abilities evaluation, finding them reasonable and necessary to investigate ongoing impairments.

The remaining claims for treatment plans and an award for unreasonable delay were dismissed.

The applicant sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits, including assessments and chiropractic treatment, following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefits, relying on insurer's examinations and social media surveillance showing the applicant travelling internationally and engaging in physical activities.

The Tribunal found that only one chiropractic treatment plan was reasonable and necessary, supported by the family physician's recommendations.

The remaining assessment and treatment plans were denied, as the evidence demonstrated the applicant had returned to her pre-accident functional level and did not exhibit symptoms warranting further investigation.

The Tribunal also denied the applicant's claim for an award under Regulation 664, finding no unreasonable delay by the respondent.