Myron Sidenberg

The insurer sought a stay of arbitration under section 50(b) of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule until the applicant attended a psychiatric examination under section 42.

The applicant argued the examination was unreasonable because the insurer had already terminated her income replacement benefits based on physical assessments and had acted in bad faith.

The arbitrator found that the applicant had placed her psychological condition in issue by submitting a psychologist's report indicating she was disabled due to psychological impairments.

The arbitrator held that the requested examination was reasonably required and ordered the applicant to attend the assessment before proceeding to arbitration on her income replacement benefits claim.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits.

A previous arbitration dealt with her loss of earning capacity (LEC) benefit, during which her counsel agreed to a specific pre-accident earning capacity (PEC) amount.

Three years later, the applicant sought to challenge the PEC calculation again following a mandatory review under section 33 of the Schedule.

The insurer raised preliminary issues of limitation periods, issue estoppel, and jurisdiction.

The arbitrator found that while the limitation period had not expired and the Commission had jurisdiction, the applicant was bound by her counsel's previous agreement on the PEC amount.

The arbitrator held that section 33 does not automatically reopen the PEC calculation and that the applicant was estopped from relitigating the issue.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits from the insurer.

The insurer terminated income replacement benefits and stopped paying for chiropractic treatment.

The applicant applied for arbitration, seeking ongoing income replacement benefits, payment for chiropractic treatment, and a special award.

The arbitrator found that the applicant was not entitled to ongoing income replacement benefits, as he had returned to work and failed to prove a disabling psychological impairment.

The claim for chiropractic expenses was also dismissed, as the treatment only reinforced chronic pain behaviour and was not reasonable and necessary.

However, the arbitrator granted a special award of $1,300 because the insurer unreasonably delayed payment of a rehabilitation account.