Ava Williams

The appellant appealed the Registrar of Motor Vehicles' decision to suspend his driver's licence based on a medical condition report from a psychiatrist indicating untreated schizophrenia.

The appellant's family physician provided evidence that the appellant does not have a mental health condition and endorsed his return to driving.

The Tribunal accepted the family physician's evidence over the psychiatrist's one-time assessment, finding that the Registrar failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that the appellant suffers from a medical condition likely to significantly interfere with his ability to drive safely.

The suspension was set aside.

The applicant sought a determination of catastrophic impairment under criterion 8 and entitlement to income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident.

The respondent brought a preliminary motion to bar the application due to the applicant's failure to attend a follow-up insurer's examination.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding the requested examination was not reasonable and necessary given the timing and lack of new issues.

On the substantive issues, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove she suffered a catastrophic impairment, preferring the respondent's experts who found her impairments were moderate and largely attributable to a pre-existing major depressive episode.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claims for income replacement benefits, an award, and interest.

The applicant was struck by a motor vehicle while riding his bicycle and sought a determination of catastrophic impairment under criteria 6 (brain injury) and 8 (mental or behavioural disorder) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The applicant relied heavily on a revised incident report from a paramedic indicating a depressed Glasgow Coma Scale score, which contradicted the original reports showing a perfect score.

The Tribunal found the revised report lacked credibility and rejected the expert opinions relying upon it.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded the applicant failed to prove he sustained a brain injury or a resulting mental and behavioural disorder, and dismissed the application for catastrophic impairment, an award, interest, and costs.

The applicant sought a catastrophic impairment (CAT) designation following a 2011 motor vehicle accident.

The applicant claimed a marked impairment in multiple domains due to mental and behavioural disorders.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's impairments largely pre-dated the accident, stemming from a 2007 workplace injury and subsequent incidents.

The Tribunal concluded that the accident only mildly exacerbated the pre-existing conditions and did not significantly impede useful functioning.

The application for CAT designation was dismissed.