Mary Catherine Lill

The applicant, who was catastrophically impaired following a 2012 motorcycle accident, sought entitlement to 24-hour attendant care benefits ($7,522.85 per month) due to severe psychological impairments, including panic attacks, memory issues, and anger outbursts.

The respondent argued that 24-hour supervision was not an appropriate psychological treatment and recommended cognitive behavioural therapy instead.

The Tribunal found that while therapy might eventually reduce the applicant's fear of being alone, the proposed attendant care was reasonable and necessary in the interim to address significant safety concerns and manage his psychological symptoms.

The applicant was awarded the ongoing attendant care benefits.

The applicant, injured in a motor vehicle accident, sought statutory accident benefits from the insurer.

At a pre-hearing discussion, the applicant requested that the insurer disclose whether it possessed any surveillance evidence and, if so, to elect whether it intended to rely on it within 60 days.

The insurer refused, arguing that the Dispute Resolution Practice Code did not permit early disclosure orders.

The arbitrator held that section 22(1) of the Insurance Act and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act grant arbitrators the discretion to order the production of documents and alter timelines to prevent unfair surprise.

The arbitrator ordered the insurer to disclose the existence of any surveillance forthwith and to make its election on reliance within 60 days.