The appellant appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision regarding her entitlement to attendant care benefits and home modifications under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule following a 2010 motor vehicle accident.
The appellant argued LAT erred in determining the applicable hourly rates, assessing her need for supervisory care, denying home modifications, and violating her Charter equality rights by distinguishing between mental and physical impairments.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no errors of law, as LAT correctly applied the 1996 Schedule rates, provided adequate reasons for preferring the respondent's expert evidence, and appropriately applied the reasonable and necessary test for home modifications.
