Kayla Benjamin

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming catastrophic impairment under Criteria 7 and 8 of the Schedule due to vascular dementia and other impairments.

The respondent denied the benefits, noting the applicant had already reached the non-catastrophic funding limit.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to meet the burden of proving catastrophic impairment, as the medical evidence did not establish a 55% whole person impairment under Criterion 7 or a marked impairment in three domains under Criterion 8.

Consequently, the claims for additional medical benefits, interest, and a section 10 award were dismissed.

The applicant sought a determination that she sustained a catastrophic impairment due to psychological injuries following a motor vehicle accident, along with payment for assessment costs.

The Tribunal found the applicant to be an unreliable historian, noting significant inconsistencies between her testimony and her pre-accident psychiatric records which documented pre-existing depression, poor memory, and suicidal thoughts.

The Tribunal placed little weight on the applicant's expert reports because they relied on her incomplete self-reporting.

The application was dismissed as the applicant failed to prove she suffered marked impairments in three domains of functioning as a result of the accident.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, arguing that his injuries warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to pre-existing conditions, psychological impairments, and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide compelling medical evidence that his pre-existing back injury precluded recovery within the MIG.

Furthermore, the Tribunal was not persuaded that the applicant suffered a psychological impairment or chronic pain with functional impairment as a direct result of the subject accident.

Consequently, the applicant's injuries were deemed predominantly minor.

The Tribunal ordered that the applicant is entitled to the disputed treatment plans only up to the remaining amount of the $3,500 MIG limit, as such benefits are deemed reasonable and necessary under s. 40(8) of the Schedule.