Shawn MacDonald

The applicant sought medical benefits for physiotherapy services following a 2011 motor vehicle accident.

The respondent denied the treatment plans, arguing the injuries were related to a prior 2010 accident.

The Tribunal struck the applicant's reply submissions for improperly introducing new arguments.

On the substantive issue, the Tribunal found the applicant failed to prove the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary in relation to the 2011 accident, noting significant factual inaccuracies in the applicant's medical evidence and a failure to distinguish the impairments from the 2010 accident.

The application was dismissed.

The respondent requested costs following the dismissal of the applicant's request for reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision.

The respondent argued that the applicant's reconsideration request was unreasonable, frivolous, vexatious, and in bad faith.

The Executive Chair found that while the applicant's arguments for reconsideration were not persuasive, they did not meet the threshold of being vexatious or frivolous under Rule 19.

The request for costs was denied.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that found his injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline and that there was insufficient evidence to vary his income replacement benefit.

The Executive Chair denied the request, finding that the Tribunal did not mischaracterize the issues, did not err in its consideration of the evidence, and that the applicant's proposed new evidence could have reasonably been obtained prior to the original hearing.