The issue revolved around the family of the accident victim, JG, who was deemed psychologically catastrophically impaired as a result of witnessing her friend being struck and killed by a vehicle. JG’s spouse and children applied for accident benefits claiming they had suffered psychological injury as a result of JG’s psychological impairments. The claimants applied under the definition of an “insured person” pursuant to section 3(1)(a)(ii) of the SABS. The insurer contested this, noting that JG did not sustain a physical injury in the accident. The claimants submitted various evidence regarding the alleged psychological injuries that they had sustained post-accident; however, Adjudicator Kaur was unable to find any specific diagnosis or clear indication of psychological injury in the records. The records of the accident victim, JG, detailed various psychological issues, but the medical evidence provided did not make reference to an objective physical injurie sustained as a direct result of the accident. Adjudicator Kuar concluded that as JG did not sustain any physical injury in the accident, the claimants were not considered to be insured persons pursuant to the SABS. The Application was dismissed.
