Albert Wong

The applicant sought various statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including physiotherapy services, an attendant care assessment, and a functional ability evaluation.

The respondent denied the benefits, relying on insurer's examinations which indicated the applicant had reached maximal recovery and returned to work.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the proposed treatment plans and assessments were reasonable and necessary.

The Tribunal dismissed all claims for benefits, interest, a section 10 award, and costs.

The applicant sought various medical and rehabilitation benefits, attendant care benefits, an award, and interest following a 2018 motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline and that pre-existing injuries from a 2016 accident were the primary cause of his ongoing complaints.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish that the proposed treatment plans were reasonable and necessary, noting a lack of objective medical evidence and failure to submit a required Form 1 for attendant care benefits.

The application was dismissed in its entirety.

The applicant sought accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied a medical benefit for hospital expenses, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit of $3,500, which had been exhausted.

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on pre-existing psychological and physical conditions, as well as chronic pain.

The Tribunal found the applicant's physical injuries were predominantly minor soft tissue injuries.

The Tribunal also held that the applicant failed to provide compelling evidence that her pre-existing conditions prevented maximal medical recovery within the MIG, or that she suffered from functionally disabling chronic pain.

The application was dismissed.

The plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident with a rental vehicle.

After the two-year limitation period expired, the plaintiff sought to add the renter of the vehicle as a defendant, arguing that the rental company failed to provide the renter's identity despite multiple requests.

The proposed defendant opposed the motion, arguing the claim was statute-barred.

The court found that the plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence in attempting to identify the renter and granted leave to amend the statement of claim to add the proposed defendant, without prejudice to any limitation defences.

The applicant applied for statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

After failing to resolve disputes through mediation, the applicant applied for arbitration.

The applicant failed to attend multiple pre-hearing conferences despite receiving notice and being advised of the consequences by his counsel.

The insurer sought to dismiss the arbitration.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had effectively abandoned his arbitration and that the proceeding was frivolous.

The arbitration was dismissed without a hearing pursuant to Rule 68.1 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.