2 total
LAT decision denying catastrophic impairment benefits quashed due to unreasonable findings on whole person impairment.
The appellant, who was injured in a motor vehicle accident, appealed and sought judicial review of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision denying her catastrophic impairment benefits.
The Divisional Court found that while there was no breach of procedural fairness, the Adjudicator's findings regarding the appellant's whole person impairment under Criterion 6 of the AMA Guides were unreasonable.
Specifically, the Adjudicator unreasonably dismissed evidence of double vision, peripheral neuropathy, and medication side effects.
The court quashed the decision and remitted the matter to the LAT for a new hearing before a different adjudicator.
Appeal and judicial review of LAT decision denying income replacement benefits dismissed as reasonable.
The appellant sought an appeal and judicial review of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision denying him income replacement benefits under the 'any occupation' test and denying an extension of time to request reconsideration.
The Divisional Court found no errors of law or procedural unfairness in the adjudicator's handling of expert evidence, cross-examination, or factual findings.
The court held the adjudicator's decision was reasonable and dismissed the appeal and judicial review application.