Licence Appeal Tribunal
Licence Appeal Tribunal File Number: 23-009212/AABS
In the matter of an application pursuant to subsection 280(2) of the Insurance Act, RSO 1990, c I.8, in relation to statutory accident benefits.
Between:
Mark Ozretic
Applicant
and
Intact Insurance Company
Respondent
DECISION
VICE-CHAIR: Craig Mazerolle
APPEARANCES:
For the Applicant: No submissions
For the Respondent: Christopher Marshall, Counsel
HEARD: By way of Written Submissions
OVERVIEW
1Mark Ozretic, the applicant, was involved in an automobile accident on February 1, 2021, and sought benefits pursuant to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule – Effective September 1, 2010 (including amendments effective June 1, 2016) (the “Schedule”). The applicant was denied benefits by the respondent, Intact Insurance Company, and applied to the Licence Appeal Tribunal - Automobile Accident Benefits Service (the “Tribunal”) for resolution of the dispute.
2In a case conference report and order released on January 25, 2024, the Tribunal ordered the dispute to proceed to a written hearing. The Tribunal scheduled a written hearing for August 30, 2024, with the Notice of Written Hearing e-mailed to the parties on February 1, 2024.
3The applicant’s initial submissions were due on July 31, 2024. The applicant has not provided any written submissions to the Tribunal. There has also been no Notice of Motion filed by the applicant seeking to extend the initial submissions deadline.
4The respondent filed submissions with the Tribunal on August 13, 2024. It also sent the submissions to the applicant on August 12 and 13, 2024. The respondent states it has not received submissions from the applicant, and it is seeking a dismissal of the application.
5Following the removal of the applicant’s representative on June 26, 2024, the Tribunal e-mailed the applicant on August 20, 2024. To date, no response has been received from the applicant.
ISSUES
6As listed in the case conference report and order, the issues in dispute are:
i. Are the applicant’s injuries predominantly minor as defined in section 3 of the Schedule and therefore subject to treatment within the $3,500.00 Minor Injury Guideline (“MIG”) limit?
ii. Is the applicant entitled to $3,776.00 for physiotherapy services, proposed by Dr. Adrian Cohen in a treatment plan/OCF-18 (“plan”) dated August 27, 2021 and denied September 10, 2021?
iii. Is the applicant entitled to interest on any overdue payment of benefits?
ANALYSIS
7Section 7(2) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22 states that, if notice of a written hearing has been given to a party who does not then participate in the hearing in accordance with the notice, the Tribunal may proceed with the hearing in the absence of that party’s participation. I am satisfied that both parties received notice of the written hearing, so I shall proceed without submissions from the applicant.
8The applicant has the onus of demonstrating removal from the MIG, as well as entitlement to the medical benefit and interest in dispute. By not filing any submissions or evidence with the Tribunal, I find that the applicant has not met this burden.
9I further find that the applicant did not file a Notice of Motion requesting an extension of the initial submission deadline.
ORDER
10As the applicant has made no submissions and tendered no evidence in support of the claims before the Tribunal, the applicant has not demonstrated removal from the MIG, nor has the applicant demonstrated entitlement to the medical benefit and interest in dispute.
11The application is dismissed.
Released: February 18, 2025
Craig Mazerolle
Vice-Chair