Steven Bezaire

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits following a motor vehicle accident, including the cost of catastrophic impairment assessments, physiotherapy, and medication.

The insurer denied the catastrophic assessments on the basis that the applicant had exhausted the monetary limit for medical and rehabilitation benefits.

The Tribunal held that catastrophic assessments are covered under section 25(1)5 of the Schedule and are not subject to the monetary limits set out in section 18(3)(a).

The applicant was awarded $16,272.00 for the assessments.

However, the claims for physiotherapy and medication were dismissed as the applicant failed to provide evidence that they were reasonable and necessary.

The claim for a special award was also dismissed.

The Applicant sought payment for two treatment plans (OCF-18s) proposing neuropsychometric testing and a mental health assessment, following a motor vehicle accident.

The Insurer had already approved a neuropsychological assessment but denied the other two, arguing they were duplicative and an attempt to circumvent the $2,000 statutory cap per assessment under s. 25(5) of the Schedule.

The Arbitrator found that the Applicant failed to prove the disputed assessments were reasonable and necessary, noting that the requested funding for the neuropsychometric testing exceeded the maximum hourly rate for the time spent, and the mental health assessment was duplicative of previous assessments.

The preliminary issue was resolved in favour of the Insurer.

The appellant appealed a decision regarding the validity of a release she executed in October 2000 concerning her mother's estate.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that the appellant intended to release the estate and that the estate trustee engaged in no improper or unlawful purpose.

The appeal was dismissed with costs fixed at $3,500.

The applicant union sought a declaration under subsection 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act that two companies, Tilbury Concrete Transport Inc. and Tilbury Concrete Inc., constituted a single employer.

The union held bargaining rights for the transport company's drivers, but the concrete company recently began employing its own drivers, who were organized by a different union (CUOE).

The Board found that the two companies carried on related activities under common control and direction within a family enterprise.

Although a declaration would disturb the CUOE's existing bargaining rights, the Board exercised its discretion to issue the declaration because the CUOE failed to defend its rights and effectively abandoned them.

The declaration was made retroactive to the companies' incorporation, rendering the CUOE's subsequent certification untimely.