Rocky Wang

The applicant and respondent both requested reconsideration of a previous Licence Appeal Tribunal decision.

The applicant sought reconsideration regarding the denial of income replacement benefits and treatment plans, while the respondent challenged the finding that the applicant was involved in an 'accident' and not subject to the Minor Injury Guideline.

The adjudicator found that neither party met the high threshold for reconsideration under Rule 18.2, as both were attempting to re-litigate issues and re-weigh evidence already considered.

Both requests for reconsideration were dismissed.

The applicant sought entitlement to a $4,008.42 physiotherapy treatment plan following a motor vehicle accident.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding the applicant failed to provide contemporaneous medical evidence from a qualified physical rehabilitation specialist to support the plan.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent's physiatrist, who concluded the applicant had full range of motion and the treatment was not reasonable and necessary.

Claims for interest and a section 10 award were also dismissed.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits after slipping and falling on ice while closing his car door.

The respondent denied the claim, arguing the incident did not meet the definition of an 'accident' under the Schedule.

The Tribunal found that the incident was an accident, as the applicant was actively using his vehicle and the ice was not an intervening event.

The Tribunal also determined that the applicant's fractured elbow removed him from the Minor Injury Guideline.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the claims for an income replacement benefit and specific treatment plans because the applicant failed to provide sufficient medical evidence or copies of the treatment plans to prove entitlement.