The claimant appealed the Tribunal’s decision that his injuries fell within the MIG and that he was not entitled to disputed medical benefits. The Court dismissed the appeal. The Court held that the Tribunal properly approached the competing medical and expert evidence. The Tribunal was entitled to reject the opinion of the claimant’s expert notwithstanding the insurer not having a responding expert report. The claimant’s arguments regarding the weight of medical evidence and opinion was not reviewable on appeal. The Tribunal’s findings regarding pre-existing conditions considered the medical evidence submitted, and the conclusions were reasonable. Finally, the Tribunal was under no obligation to request the parties submit more evidence or better evidence when confronted with illegible doctor’s notes. A written hearing format was agreed upon by the parties, and the claimant had the obligation to put forward evidence in support of his position.
