The appellant appealed a License Appeal Tribunal (LAT) decision denying his claims for a catastrophic impairment designation, attendant care benefits, and various treatment plans following a motor vehicle accident.
The Divisional Court found no errors of law in the LAT Vice-Chair's application of the 'but for' causation test or her factual findings that the appellant's ongoing impairments were not accident-related.
The court also held that the LAT correctly dismissed the claims for treatment plans and attendant care benefits, as the appellant had no accident-related impairments during the relevant periods.
The appeal was dismissed.
