Olubunmi Akinsanmi

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

The respondent insurer brought a preliminary issue seeking to stay the application because the applicant failed to attend a scheduled insurer's examination.

The Tribunal found the requested examination was duplicative and not reasonably necessary, and thus the applicant was not non-compliant.

On the substantive issues, the Tribunal removed the applicant from the Minor Injury Guideline on the basis of accident-related chronic pain with functional impairment.

The Tribunal also approved the disputed treatment plans for physiotherapy, a chronic pain assessment, a physiatry assessment, and a neurological assessment, finding them reasonable and necessary, and awarded interest on overdue payments.

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

The respondent denied several treatment plans and argued the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The respondent also argued the applicant was barred from proceeding due to her failure to attend a second psychological insurer's examination.

The Tribunal found the requested examination was not reasonable and necessary, as the respondent had already conducted one and failed to justify the need for an in-person re-assessment based on updated medical records.

On the merits, the Tribunal removed the applicant from the MIG, finding she suffered from accident-related chronic lower back pain with functional impairments, supported by her treating chronic pain clinic's records.

The Tribunal granted entitlement to psychological and chronic pain assessments, as well as physiotherapy, but denied a neurological assessment.

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

The respondent denied benefits beyond the $3,500 Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) limit and terminated income replacement benefits.

The Tribunal found that the applicant's physical injuries fell within the definition of a minor injury and that she failed to establish a pre-existing condition, chronic pain, or psychological impairment warranting removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal accepted the respondent's expert evidence, which raised significant validity concerns regarding the applicant's presentation, over the applicant's evidence.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for ongoing income replacement benefits, finding the applicant failed to prove a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her employment.

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

The applicant claimed psychological impairments, chronic pain, and a pre-existing osteoarthritis condition warranted removal from the MIG.

The Tribunal found insufficient evidence of psychological impairment or chronic pain caused by the accident, and no evidence that his pre-existing condition prevented maximal recovery within the MIG.

The Tribunal also dismissed the claim for non-earner benefits, finding the applicant was not continuously prevented from engaging in substantially all of his pre-accident activities.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a rear-end motor vehicle collision and sought statutory accident benefits.

The respondent insurer denied further treatment and non-earner benefits, arguing the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the applicant's injuries fell outside the MIG due to chronic pain syndrome, relying on the applicant's credible testimony and the evidence of a chronic pain specialist.

Applying the Heath framework, the Tribunal also found the applicant suffered a complete inability to carry on a normal life and awarded non-earner benefits.

The disputed treatment plans for physiotherapy and a chronic pain assessment were deemed reasonable and necessary and were approved with interest.

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

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

The applicant contended she should be removed from the MIG due to pre-existing knee pain and accident-related psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found insufficient medical evidence to support that the pre-existing knee condition would prevent recovery within the MIG, or that the applicant suffered a significant psychological impairment.

Consequently, the applicant's injuries were deemed predominantly minor, and the disputed treatment plans for psychological, chiropractic, and physiotherapy services were found not reasonable and necessary.

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

The respondent insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the medical evidence, including clinical notes from treating physicians and diagnostic imaging, supported a finding of minor soft tissue injuries.

The Tribunal afforded little weight to the applicant's chronic pain specialist's report, noting it lacked objective testing and was contradicted by other medical records.

The application was dismissed as the injuries were subject to the MIG.

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

At the arbitration hearing, the applicant failed to attend.

The applicant's legal representatives brought a motion to withdraw as counsel due to a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship, which was granted.

Because the applicant did not appear and presented no evidence to support his claims, his application for benefits was dismissed.

The applicant was ordered to pay the insurer's expenses in the amount of $1,750.