Shivani Mehta

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and applied for statutory accident benefits.

After the applicant failed to attend two case conferences, the respondent requested that the application be dismissed as abandoned.

The Tribunal initially found that the application had been withdrawn by the applicant's paralegal at the first case conference.

The respondent requested a reconsideration, arguing that the application should be dismissed as abandoned and that the Tribunal breached procedural fairness by accepting late submissions from the applicant that were not served on the respondent.

The Executive Chair denied the request for reconsideration, finding that while a breach of procedural fairness occurred, it was inconsequential and caused no prejudice.

The Executive Chair upheld the finding that the application was withdrawn rather than abandoned, and denied the respondent's request for costs.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for attendant care provided by her husband, a medical doctor, following a motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the benefits on the basis that the expenses were not 'incurred' under section 3(7)(e) of the Schedule.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to prove the services were provided as claimed, there was no legal obligation to pay, and the husband did not sustain an economic loss or provide the services in the ordinary course of his profession.

The Tribunal also denied the cost of an examination and held it lacked jurisdiction to grant equitable relief such as estoppel.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits.

After 104 weeks, the respondent scheduled insurer's examinations to determine ongoing entitlement.

The applicant failed to attend the examinations due to a scheduling conflict with her school attendance, insisting on weekend appointments.

The respondent suspended benefits and raised a preliminary issue that the applicant was precluded from proceeding before the Tribunal under section 55 of the Schedule.

The Tribunal found that while the failure to attend was due to a miscommunication, the applicant must still attend the examinations before proceeding with her claim, and ordered her to make herself available during the week.

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

After her legal representative was removed from the record, the applicant failed to participate in a pre-hearing and could not be reached.

The insurer requested that the application be dismissed.

The arbitrator scheduled a motion and provided notice to the applicant.

When the applicant failed to participate in the motion, the arbitrator dismissed the application for arbitration as frivolous, vexatious, or commenced in bad faith under Rule 68 of the Dispute Resolution Practice Code.

The insurer waived its request for expenses.