The applicant was injured in motor vehicle accidents in 1994 and 1996.
Following a failed mediation and a purported settlement, the parties disputed which statutory accident benefit claims could proceed to arbitration.
The arbitrator held that a pragmatic and flexible approach should be applied to the mediation requirement.
The applicant was permitted to proceed to arbitration on the quantum of income replacement benefits and supplementary medical/rehabilitation benefits, as they flowed consequentially from the mediated issues or were captured by the broad descriptions in the mediation applications.
However, claims for attendant care and housekeeping were barred from arbitration because they were not expressly mediated, did not flow from mediated issues, and would cause prejudice to the insurer.