Kathryn Watson

The applicant sought a catastrophic impairment determination following a motor vehicle accident on August 18, 2016.

The respondent rejected the application because it used the pre-June 1, 2016 definition of catastrophic impairment.

The applicant argued that his policy, which was in force from May 1, 2016 to May 1, 2017, was a transitional policy and therefore the old definition applied.

The Tribunal found that the new definition of catastrophic impairment under s. 3.1(1) of the Schedule applies to accidents occurring on or after June 1, 2016, regardless of when the policy was issued or renewed.

The applicant's claim was withdrawn as he submitted the incorrect application.

The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident on August 18, 2016, and sought a catastrophic impairment determination.

The respondent rejected the application because it used the pre-June 1, 2016 definition of catastrophic impairment.

The applicant argued her policy was a transitional policy and the old definition applied.

The Tribunal found that the new definition of catastrophic impairment under s. 3.1(1) of the Schedule applies to accidents occurring on or after June 1, 2016.

The applicant's policy was not a transitional policy under s. 68, the respondent did not waive its right to rely on the new definition, and the applicant had no vested right to the old definition.

The applicant withdrew her claim to submit the correct application.