Raffi Akelian

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

The insurer denied the claims on the basis that the applicant's injuries fell within the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) and the $3,500 limit was exhausted.

The applicant argued for removal from the MIG based on left shoulder injuries, pre-existing spine conditions, chronic pain, and psychological impairments.

The Tribunal found that the shoulder injuries were minor, the pre-existing spine conditions did not preclude recovery within the MIG, and the claims of chronic pain and psychological impairment were uncorroborated and inconsistent with the evidence.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming her injuries, including chronic pain and psychological impairments, warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found the applicant's injuries were predominantly minor, noting the lack of contemporaneous medical evidence supporting chronic pain or psychological conditions and giving limited weight to a late expert report.

As the MIG limit applied, the disputed treatment plans were not payable.

Claims for an award for unreasonable delay and interest were also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming entitlement to a $3,518.00 physiotherapy treatment plan and removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG) due to chronic pain.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish chronic pain with functional impairment, noting that the medical evidence relied heavily on self-reports and contradicted the family physician's records.

As the applicant's injuries were deemed predominantly minor and the $3,500 MIG limit was exhausted, the claim for the treatment plan and interest was dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, claiming her injuries, including a partial shoulder tear and chronic pain, warranted removal from the Minor Injury Guideline (MIG).

The Tribunal found that the partial shoulder tear and soft tissue injuries fell within the MIG definition.

The Tribunal also concluded the applicant failed to establish chronic pain with functional impairment, noting inconsistencies in her medical records and giving limited weight to her physiatry assessment.

The applicant was found to remain within the MIG and was awarded only the remaining balance of her $3,500 limit.

At a case conference arising from a motor vehicle accident, counsel for a plaintiff in a related action advised she was unable to contact her clients and was considering a motion to be removed from the record.

The court adjourned the case conference to allow counsel to determine her position and to investigate whether her client's death was caused by the accident.

The plaintiffs and defendant in a motor vehicle accident action reached a settlement at mediation, subject to the plaintiff in a companion action agreeing to limit her claim to the remaining policy limits.

Counsel for the plaintiff in the companion action failed to attend the case conference despite a previous endorsement directing her to do so.

The court adjourned the case conference and ordered counsel for the plaintiff in the companion action to attend the next date to address the status of her action, document production, the cause of her client's death, and whether she will limit her damages to the remaining policy limits.

This endorsement addresses a procedural issue in a motor vehicle accident action where a settlement could not be finalized due to the plaintiff in a companion action failing to provide their position regarding policy limits.

The plaintiff in the current action sought directions from the court.

The court declined to make immediate orders affecting the absent party but adjourned the case conference and directed the defendant to ensure the companion action's plaintiff attends the next conference, reserving the right to make procedural orders under Rule 50.13(6).

The plaintiff sought default judgment for personal injuries sustained from a dog bite.

The defendants were noted in default and did not respond to the action.

The court found both defendants liable as "owners" under the Dog Owner's Liability Act, establishing joint and several liability.

General damages were assessed at $40,000, considering the severity of the physical injuries (including multiple surgeries for Dupuytren's Disease and permanent scarring) and psychological impacts (anxiety, fear of dogs, nightmares).

Special damages of $120.51 and costs of $14,887.11 were also awarded, resulting in a total judgment of $55,007.62 for the plaintiff.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sought statutory accident benefits for physiotherapy and an orthopaedic assessment.

The respondent insurer denied the claims, arguing the applicant had reached maximal medical recovery.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal found the physiotherapy treatment plan reasonable and necessary, noting the applicant had not pursued surgery due to age-related risks and had not reached maximal medical recovery.

However, the Tribunal denied the request for an orthopaedic assessment, finding it duplicative of a recent examination by an orthopaedic consultant and lacking compelling evidence of a need for further assessment.