The claimant applied to the LAT for a determination that she was catastrophically impaired under Criterion 8. The claimant struggled with anxiety due to pre-existing health issues, for which she received treatment prior to the accident. It was thus incumbent upon the claimant to demonstrate on a balance of probabilities that, but for the accident, she would not have been psychologically impaired. Adjudicators Grant and Fogarty specified that in situations like this, the accident need not be sufficient per se to have caused the impairments in question but need only have been a “necessary cause”, leading to an exacerbation of the claimant’s pre-existing condition. The claimant argued that, prior to the accident she had been in remission from her pre-existing mental health issues and that she was not receiving any treatment for them. The insurer contended that the sole cause of the claimant’s psychological issues were her past health issues. Adjudicators Grant and Fogarty held that the claimant was struggling with and being treated for her long-standing mental health issues immediately prior to the accident. But for the accident, the claimant would have still been receiving treatment for her mental health issues. Furthermore, there was evidence that the claimant had reduced the dosage of her anti-anxiety medication and that her prognosis and ability to cope with her prognosis had improved since the accident. This led the Adjudicators to conclude that her condition was not exacerbated by the accident and that the claimant’s condition did not rise to the level of a Class 4 impairment under the SABS.
Menu