Joelle Sears-Briggs

The Applicant sought costs and an award under s. 10 of O. Reg. 664 after the Insurer approved a treatment plan prior to the case conference.

The Applicant alleged the Insurer acted in bad faith and unreasonably delayed payment by refusing to pay a disbursement fee for medical records.

The Insurer also sought costs, arguing the Applicant's conduct was frivolous and vexatious.

The Tribunal dismissed both costs requests, finding neither party's conduct during the proceeding met the threshold under Rule 19.1.

The Tribunal also denied the Applicant's request for an award, concluding the Insurer acted reasonably in waiting for updated medical records before approving the treatment plan.

The applicant, who sustained a catastrophic impairment, sought payment for mileage expenses incurred by his service providers travelling to his home for treatment.

The insurer denied the mileage claims, arguing the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule (SABS) and related Guidelines do not require payment for provider travel costs.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal agreed with the insurer, finding that while the SABS explicitly covers transportation expenses for insured persons and their aides, it does not mandate payment for service provider mileage.

The application for mileage expenses was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits and filed an application for dispute resolution after the insurer denied a treatment plan.

Prior to the case conference, the insurer approved the treatment plan, but the applicant sought costs for preparing the application.

The Tribunal held a preliminary issue hearing to determine if it had jurisdiction to consider the costs request after the main issue was resolved.

The Tribunal found that the proceeding had not ended because the application was not withdrawn and the costs issue remained outstanding, concluding it had jurisdiction to consider the request under Rule 19.1.