Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP is pleased to provide this online resource to our clients. Below is a searchable database of the publicly released decisions from the Licence Appeal Tribunal. Assembled by the accident benefits group, the decisions are reviewed, briefly summarized, and categorized for easy access.
As of March 2020, we will not include any further decisions focused solely on the Minor Injury Guideline or treatment plans, unless the case may have broader applicability.
The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs up to the 104 week mark. Adjudicator Parish held that the claimant did not meet the disability test and dismissed the claim. She accepted that the claimant had psychological impairments, but that the impairments pre-dated the accident. She also made an adverse inference about the claimant's occupational activities due...
The claimant applied to the LAT disputing entitlement to IRBs. The insurer denied entitlement in June 2017. The LAT application was made in July 2019. Adjudicator Lake accepted that the LAT dispute was commenced outside the limitation period by a few weeks, and thus barred by the limitation period. She also held that she did...
The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs. The insurer argued that the limitation period barred the dispute. Adjudicator Lake held that the limitation period applied and that she did not have jurisdiction to extend the limitation period under the LAT Act. She also held that she did not have jurisdiction to apply the doctrine of equitable...
The insurer brought a motion for suspension of the claimant's benefits due to his failure to attend an examination under oath seven months prior to a scheduled hearing. Adjudicator Mazerolle granted the suspension. He rejected the claimant's argument that there was a temporal limitation on when an insurer could request an examination under oath. The...
The claimant applied for reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision that section 31 barred his claim for IRBs because of a material misrepresentation relating to her address, which resulted in lower insurance premiums. Vice Chair Johal dismissed the reconsideration request. The Vice Chair held that the Tribunal did not err in allowing evidence of the phone...
A preliminary issues hearing was held to address whether the claimant was barred from proceeding with his claim for NEBs as he failed to submit an OCF-10 electing NEBs. The claimant submitted an OCF-3 supporting IRBs and NEBs. The insurer requested the claimant submit a completed OCF-10 election of benefits. The claimant failed to submit...
The insurer raised two preliminary issues in advance of the hearing: (1) to bar the claimant from proceeding with her claim for IRBs due to failure to commence her application withing the two year limitation period; and (2) to dismiss the application for procedural delay and awarding costs. Vice Chair Boyce found the applicant was...
The claimant sought a special award on the basis that the insurer unreasonably withheld and delayed payment of her claim for NEBs. The insurer failed to acknowledge receipt of the claimant's OCF-3, and ignored several requests from the claimant requesting confirmation and updates on the status of payments. The insurer had no explanation as to...
The preliminary issue in this matter was to determine whether the claimant was limitation-barred from disputing entitlement to ACBs in relation to two accidents due to his failure to dispute the denials within two years. Adjudicator Boyce concluded that the claimant was limitation-barred on both ACB claims. Pursuant to s. 56 of the Schedule, an...
The insurer raised a preliminary issue in respect to whether the claimant was involved in two accidents. Adjudicator McGee found that the claimant was involved in both an April 8, 2016 accident and an October 4, 2016 accident. The facts of this case are unusual. At the time of both accidents, the claimant was incarcerated...
The insurer appealed the Tribunal's decision that the claimant was involved in an accident. The claimant slipped and fell on ice while making her way to a Lyft vehicle in her driveway. The Court granted the appeal and concluded that the facts of loss did not qualify as an accident. The Tribunal erred by conflating...
A preliminary issues hearing was held to determine whether the claimant's claim for IRBs was barred pursuant to s. 31(1)(a)(ii) of the SABS, which provides that an insurer is not required to pay an IRB if the claimant was driving an automobile without a valid driver's licence. The claimant asserted that he was unaware at...
The claimant applied to Certas for accident benefits. Certas brought an application to the LAT arguing that the claimant was not involved in an "accident" and sought repayment of accident benefits because the claimant wilfully misrepresented facts in relation to her application for benefits. Adjudicator Maleki-Yazdi agreed that the claimant was not involved in an...
A preliminary issues hearing was held to determine whether the claimant was involved in an "accident" as defined in s. 3(1) of the SABS. The claimant and insurer agreed on the following facts: On the day of the accident, the claimant drove to a feed store with her husband to purchase horse feed. The claimant...
The claimant disputed her MIG determination and her entitlement to medical benefits. In regard to the MIG, Adjudicator Moten found the claimant's prior injury to her coccygeal region prevented maximal recovery if she were limited to the $3,500 minor injury limits. Adjudicator Moten also found there was compelling evidence in the claimant's health practitioners' medical...
The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs and medical benefits; the insurer required the claimant to attend s. 44 insurer's examinations. The claimant did not attend the IEs and submitted an application to the LAT. The insurer requested a preliminary issue hearing and Adjudicator Farlam found that the claimant was barred from proceeding with her application...
The claimant was involved in a accident on October 21, 2017, and was paid an IRB for one year. The insurer terminated the claimant's IRB on the basis that they did not suffer a substantial inability to perform the tasks of their pre-accident employment. The claimant filed a LAT Application disputing IRBs up to the...
Aviva brought an application arguing that the claimant was not involved in an accident and sought repayment of IRBs in the amount of $22,647.59. Aviva relied on surveillance showing the claimant attending his place of employment on several occasions as well as review of the police report from the January 11, 2019 accident that showed...
Aviva brought an application seeking repayment of IRBs because the claimant wilfully misrepresented facts in relation to her return to work and receipt of maternity benefits while she received IRBs. Adjudicator Boyce found that Aviva was entitled to repayment in the amount of $14,568.36 due to overpayment of IRBs. Adjudicator Boyce agreed with Aviva that...
The preliminary issue in this matter was whether the claimant was statute barred from disputing the attendant care benefit and treatment plans for physiotherapy due to the expiry of the limitation period in s. 56 of the Schedule. Adjudicator Johal concluded that the claimant was entitled to dispute these denials at the Tribunal. Adjudicator Johal...
The claimant was deemed catastrophically impaired on the basis of his Glasgow Coma Scale. Issues arose between the parties concerning the claimant’s entitlement to rehabilitation benefits under the Schedule. The insurer denied payment and the claimant appealed to the LAT for payment of these benefits. Adjudicator Kowal concluded that the claimant was not entitled to...