Mark Pascoal

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

The insurer denied various treatment plans for physiotherapy, psychological services, and assessments on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on chronic pain and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found insufficient medical evidence to support a diagnosis of chronic pain with functional impairment or a psychological condition caused by the accident.

The application was dismissed, and the applicant was limited to the $3,500 MIG cap.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, disputing the insurer's determination that her injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued she should be removed from the MIG due to a pre-existing left shoulder condition and chronic pain.

The Tribunal found that while the applicant had a documented pre-existing condition, there was no compelling medical evidence that it would prevent maximal recovery within the MIG limits.

Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded the applicant did not suffer from chronic pain with functional impairment, as she continued to work and medical imaging was normal.

The application for treatment plans beyond the MIG limit and interest was dismissed.

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

The respondent denied the benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The applicant argued she should be removed from the MIG due to psychological impairments, chronic pain with functional impairment, and a pre-existing chronic pain condition.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that her psychological impairments or chronic pain with functional impairment were caused by the subject accident, or that she had a documented pre-existing condition precluding her recovery within the MIG.

As the $3,500 MIG limit had been exhausted, the disputed treatment plans and claim for interest were dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following two motor vehicle accidents.

After multiple adjournments, the applicant failed to attend the scheduled video hearing.

The applicant's daughter attended to advise he could not attend due to unforeseen circumstances, but the applicant could not be reached.

The adjudicator proceeded in the applicant's absence pursuant to s. 7(3) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.

As the applicant provided no submissions or evidence, he failed to meet his burden of proof.

The claims for benefits were dismissed, and the respondent's request for costs was directed to proceed in writing.