Kristopher B. Angle

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG due to a pre-existing condition and a psychological impairment.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue injuries and that she failed to provide compelling medical evidence of a pre-existing condition or psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG.

Consequently, the disputed treatment plan for chiropractic services was deemed not reasonable and necessary, and claims for an award and interest were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought medical and rehabilitation benefits under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The insurer denied treatment plans for physiotherapy and an in-home occupational therapy assessment.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the first physiotherapy treatment plan was reasonable and necessary, as the applicant's condition had regressed when treatment was paused during the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for the occupational therapy assessment and a subsequent physiotherapy plan, finding insufficient medical evidence to support them.

The applicant's claim for an award for unreasonable delay was also dismissed.

The appellant insurer appealed a Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision ordering it to pay for disputed chiropractic treatment plans once incurred.

The insurer argued the LAT lacked jurisdiction to order payment for expenses not yet incurred prior to the hearing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the LAT has broad remedial powers to determine entitlement to benefits, and requiring claimants to self-fund disputed treatments before accessing the LAT would defeat the consumer protection purpose of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.