K.P. v. Aviva General Insurance (19-001985)

The claimant applied to the LAT seeking entitlement to a treatment plan for cannabis therapy. The claimant argued that the proposed benefits were reasonable and necessary for treatment of chronic pain and disturbed sleep. The insurer argued that the cannabis treatment was not reasonable and necessary as a result of the accident, as the claimant smoked marijuana for years prior to the accident and continued to smoke the same amount of marijuana after the accident. Adjudicator Boyce found that pain relief is a legitimate goal of treatment, and that the proposed cannabis treatment was reasonable and necessary.