Monica Chakravarti

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a 2019 motor vehicle accident, claiming catastrophic impairment due to mental and behavioural disorders.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant's pre-existing severe depression and anxiety were the primary causes of her impairments, and that her condition did not significantly worsen post-accident.

The Tribunal dismissed the claims for catastrophic impairment, attendant care benefits, and disputed treatment plans, finding the applicant failed to meet her burden of proof.

Claims for an award for unreasonable delay and interest were also dismissed.

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

The respondent insurer denied several treatment plans, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant claimed a psychological impairment warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of a psychological impairment, noting discrepancies in the applicant's psychological report and accepting the respondent's assessment that no psychological diagnosis existed.

The Tribunal concluded the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor.

However, because the respondent had not fully exhausted the $3,500 MIG limit, the Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay for the disputed treatment plans up to the remaining MIG balance, provided they were already incurred, pursuant to section 40(8) of the Schedule.

Following a motion seeking dismissal of the plaintiff’s action for non‑compliance with prior court orders and seeking payment of cancellation fees arising from missed defence medical examinations, the court addressed the issue of costs.

The earlier motion had resulted in partial relief: the court declined to dismiss the action but ordered the plaintiff to attend defence medical examinations, pay cancellation fees, and clarify certain undertakings.

Considering the divided success of the parties and the plaintiff’s non‑compliance with prior orders, the court concluded that neither side achieved sufficient success to justify a costs award.

The court also declined to award costs to counsel for the Public Guardian and Trustee due to limited involvement and communication issues leading to the attendance.

The court therefore ordered that there be no order as to costs.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought a determination that she sustained a catastrophic impairment under the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The applicant relied on assessments indicating a 74% whole person impairment, while the insurer's assessors concluded she had a 31% combined impairment.

The arbitrator rejected the applicant's primary expert evidence, finding the assessor opined outside his expertise and acted as an advocate.

Preferring the insurer's experts and finding the applicant's evidence lacked credibility, the arbitrator concluded the applicant's combined physical and mental impairments resulted in a 28% whole person impairment.

The application for catastrophic impairment benefits was dismissed.