4 total
Accident benefits claim dismissed as statute-barred because applicant elected to receive WSIB benefits.
The applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident that was also a workplace accident.
He elected to claim WSIB benefits and his claim was accepted.
The respondent raised a preliminary issue that the applicant was barred from claiming statutory accident benefits under section 61 of the Schedule.
The applicant's representative was removed from the record and no submissions were filed on his behalf.
The Tribunal found that the applicant was barred from pursuing his claim for accident benefits because he was entitled to receive WSIB benefits and had not opted out to pursue a tort action.
The application was dismissed.
Motion granted in part; addendum reports admitted with right to cross-examine, and hearing adjourned.
The applicant brought a motion seeking corrections to a case conference order, restriction of the respondent's addendum medical reports, permission to cross-examine the respondent's experts, an adjournment of the hearing, and costs.
The adjudicator allowed the addendum reports but granted the applicant the right to cross-examine the authors.
The adjudicator also granted the adjournment on consent to allow for a pending catastrophic impairment examination, permitted re-examination of the applicant, denied the production of adjuster notes, and dismissed the claim for costs.
Reconsideration of LAT decision denying income replacement benefits dismissed; no error in weighing surveillance evidence.
The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that denied his claim for income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident.
The applicant argued the Tribunal erred by relying on the respondent's surveillance evidence and an assessment by Dr. Goodfield, while failing to properly weigh his own medical evidence.
The Executive Chair dismissed the request, finding that the Tribunal was entitled to weigh the evidence as it saw fit and properly concluded that the applicant's self-reporting to his medical practitioners lacked credibility when contrasted with the surveillance footage.
Income replacement benefit denied; surveillance evidence undermined applicant's credibility regarding self-reported physical limitations.
The applicant sought an income replacement benefit following a motor vehicle accident, claiming he was substantially unable to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident employment as an automobile garage owner.
The respondent insurer terminated the benefit and relied on surveillance evidence that contradicted the applicant's self-reported limitations.
The adjudicator found the applicant's medical evidence relied heavily on his self-reports, which were undermined by surveillance showing him walking without a cane, driving, and bending without visible difficulty.
The application was dismissed as the applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that he suffered a substantial inability to perform his essential tasks.
