Faisal Afridi

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on chronic pain and a psychological condition.

The Tribunal found insufficient contemporaneous medical evidence to support a diagnosis of chronic pain with functional impairment or a psychological condition beyond normal psycho-social sequelae.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries were subject to the MIG limit, making it unnecessary to assess the disputed treatment plans, and denied the claim for interest.

The applicant sought a determination that she sustained a catastrophic impairment as a result of a 2021 motor vehicle accident, relying on Criterion 8 (mental and behavioural impairments).

The respondent denied the claim, arguing the impairments were moderate and partially pre-existing.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the applicant's experts, finding that the applicant suffered marked impairments in all four spheres of function (activities of daily living, social functioning, concentration/persistence/pace, and adaptation).

The Tribunal concluded the applicant sustained a catastrophic impairment as a direct result of the accident.