LAT Case Law Summaries

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.

January 9, 2020

/

tgp-admin

D.O. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-007687)

The claimant sought entitlement to various chiropractic treatment plans, a functional cognitive assessment, and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Norris found the following: since the claimant incurred the disputed chiropractic treatment plans prior to their submission and without prior approval of the insurer or meeting any of the other exceptions under section...

January 9, 2020

/

tgp-admin

A.G. v. Coseco Insurance (18-007969)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG, entitlement to a chronic pain assessment and chronic pain program, and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Sharda found that the claimant should be removed from the MIG since the chronic pain she suffered in her neck and left shoulder were not predominantly minor injuries. Adjudicator...

January 9, 2020

/

tgp-admin

J.P. v. Allstate Insurance Company (18-008027)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and eight medical benefits. Adjudicator Boyce rejected the claims. He held that the claimant failed to adduce sufficient objective evidence of a substantial inability to engage in his pre-accident employment. All of his evidence was self-reported. Further, the claimant did not use any prescriptions to address his soft tissue...

January 9, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.S.R. v. Unifund Assurance Company (18-004772)

The insurer sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's award of NEBs and medical benefits, and that section 55 did not prevent the claimant from disputing entitlement to the medical benefits. Vice Chair Lester granted the reconsideration in relation to NEBs, but only in ordering that NEB entitlement began six months after the accident as opposed to...

January 8, 2020

/

tgp-admin

M.A. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (18-006614)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG, entitlement to various medical/rehabilitation benefits (which were denied due to the insurer's position that the MIG applied to the claimant's injuries), and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Kaur found that the claimant's pre-existing conditions did not remove him from the MIG and that he sustained...

January 8, 2020

/

tgp-admin

Z.K. v. Unifund Assurance Company (18-007924)

The claimant sought entitlement to four physiotherapy treatment plans and the cost of an impairment assessment, a multi-disciplinary catastrophic assessment, and a neurological assessment. Adjudicator Manigat rejected the opinion of the insurer's psychiatry assessor that there was no objective evidence of ongoing impairments and that the claimant did not have any functional limitations or physical...

January 7, 2020

/

tgp-admin

H.W.G. v. Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company (Travelers) (18-000126)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to a psychological assessment, chiropractic treatment, and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Corapi found that the claimant established on a balance of probabilities that her injuries were not predominantly minor injuries because of her psychological injuries; the claimant's depression and anxiety did not...

January 7, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.M. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (18-008474)

The claimant suffered a catastrophic impairment in a 2000 accident due to a GCS of 4. He sought entitlement to ACBs of over $5,000 per month, and sought retro-active ACBs back to 2015. Adjudicator Johal held that the claimant was not entitled to elevated retroactive ACBs because he provided no evidence why it was impossible...

January 7, 2020

/

tgp-admin

C.C. v. Erie Mutual Insurance Company (18-010778)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs and ACBs. Adjudicator Boyce dismissed the claims. He held that the claimant failed to place sufficient evidence before Tribunal regarding her pre-accident activities, her post-accident activities, the changes she experienced because of the accident, and the activities she placed most importance on. Further, the evidence available suggested that the...

January 6, 2020

/

tgp-admin

M.B. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (19-000030)

The claimant sought entitlement to psychological treatment, a chronic pain program, and interest on the payment of overdue benefits. Adjudicator Boyce found that the claimant was entitled to the portion of the disputed psychological treatment plan for psychological sessions; however, with respect to the remaining elements of the disputed treatment plan, he agreed with the...

January 6, 2020

/

tgp-admin

S.G. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (18-001861)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's denial of IRBs and the cost of an accounting report. Adjudicator Parish concluded that the Tribunal had not made a significant error or law or fact such that it likely would have reached a different conclusion. Most of the arguments made by the claimant were, in essence, an...

January 3, 2020

/

tgp-admin

J.P. v. Aviva General Insurance Company (18-007398)

The claimant sought entitlement to various medical/rehabilitation benefits, interest on the payment of overdue benefits, and a special award. In this amended decision, Adjudicator Punyarthi preferred the claimant's evidence over the insurer's, finding that it persuasively demonstrated the claimant was entitled to the disputed benefits. Adjudicator Punyarthi further found that the claimant was entitled to...

January 3, 2020

/

tgp-admin

D.K. v. Certas Direct Insurance Company (18-010057)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs and medical/rehabilitation benefits. Adjudicator Boyce found that the claimant did not suffer a complete inability to carry on a normal life, agreeing with the findings in the insurer's examination reports; while the reports noted headaches and intermittent neck and back pain, Adjudicator Boyce found it was "a stretch to...

December 31, 2019

/

tgp-admin

M.T. v. Intact Insurance Company (18-007131)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs, removal from the MIG, and entitlement to various medical benefits. Adjudicator Mazerolle found that the claimant's linger pain did not meet the definition of chronic pain because there was little indication of changes in her daily activities or reporting to the family physician. He also found that the claimant...

December 30, 2019

/

tgp-admin

W.C. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (19-000454)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs; the insurer argued that section 55 barred the dispute because the claimant failed to attend IEs. Adjudicator Punyarthi held that the insurer, rather than the claimant, failed to comply with section 44 by failing to make the IEs on a date, time, and location that was convenient to the...

December 27, 2019

/

tgp-admin

O.R.O. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-007650)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's denial of disputed medical benefits. Adjudicator Baker was not persuaded that there was an error in law committed by the Tribunal and that the claimant's reconsideration was a request to re-litigate the dispute.

December 20, 2019

/

tgp-admin

P.S. v. Wawanesa Mutual Insurance Company (011156)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to two treatment plans. Adjudicator Victor held that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG. The evidence supported that the claimant suffered soft tissue injuries, and did not support a pre-existing shoulder injury that would prevent maximal recovery under the MIG.

December 20, 2019

/

tgp-admin

V.R. v. Aviva Insurance Company (18-002880)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision not to award various medical benefits. Adjudicator Flude rejected the request. He wrote that the reconsideration request was essentially a request that the Tribunal reverse its findings of fact and prefer the claimant's assessor over the insurer's assessor. The reconsideration request was dismissed.

December 19, 2019

/

tgp-admin

C.L. v. TD Home and Auto Insurance Company (19-002670)

The claimant sought catastrophic injuries from an ATV accident. He applied to the LAT in relation to IRBs and HK expenses, which had been denied after the claimant returned to work. The insurer argued that the claimant was barred from proceeding with the dispute due to his failure to attend IEs. Adjudicator Boyce acknowledged that...

December 18, 2019

/

tgp-admin

A.B. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (18-004653)

The claimant sought entitlement to physiotherapy and the cost of an occupational therapy assessment conducted as part of a catastrophic impairment assessment. She also argued that HST was not part of the medical benefits limits. Adjudicator Ferguson accepted that HST was payable outside of the medical benefits limits. He concluded that the occupational therapy assessments...

December 18, 2019

/

tgp-admin

O.S. v. Travelers Insurance (18-003385)

The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal's decision to keep the claimant in the MIG and dismissing the claims for three medical benefits. Adjudicator Watt dismissed the reconsideration request. He held that none of the grounds of Rule 18.2 were satisfied. The Tribunal had considered all the evidence and weighed the evidence as it felt...

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com

© 2020 Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Statement of Principles

Powered by Crow & Pitcher

Contact Us

150 York Street, Suite 1800
Toronto, Ontario M5H 3S5

416.507.1850

eodonnell@tgplawyers.com