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.

Search

Generic filters

December 14, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Company of Canada (17-002688)

The claimant sought entitlement to a number of medical benefits for physical and psychological treatment. The insurer asserted a MIG position. Adjudicator S.F. Mather, on review of the medical evidence, determined the claimant's injuries fell outside of the MIG. The treatment plans that addressed the injuries removing the claimant from the MIG were found payable,...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Y.D. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (16-001810)

The Tribunal ruled against the claimant's application for further attendant care benefits on the basis that no expenses had been incurred, and that the Tribunal did not have equitable jurisdiction to order the ongoing payment of attendant care benefits based solely upon earlier payments of the benefit. Executive Chair Lamoureux upheld the earlier decision and...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

N.L. v. North Blenheim Mutual Insurance Company (16-002606)

The Tribunal initially held that the claimant had failed to apply to the LAT within two years. The claimant's application occurred during the transition between FSCO and the LAT. Executive Chair Lamoureux held that it was an error for the Tribunal not to consider whether the limitation period should be extended. She noted that section...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

E.D. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-002048)

The claimant was an elderly pedestrian knockdown and claimed entitlement to non-earner benefits, attendant care, and a number of medical treatment plans. Adjudicator Christopher Ferguson was critical of the evidence led by the claimant and remarked "The applicant made no submissions in this matter: she advanced no discussion or argument respecting the evidence that she...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company (17-000846)

The claimant sought entitlement to medical, attendance care, and income replacement benefits. The insurer asserted a MIG position. Adjudicator Nicole Treksler, on review of the evidence, determined that the claimant's injuries were governed by the MIG and that the claimant failed to establish a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of employment in the...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Company (17-001173)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and medical benefits. The insurer asserted the claimant's impairments were as a result of an intervening factor, namely a slip and fall, rather than the MVA. Adjudicator Catherine Bickley found the claimant to be a credible witness and attributed her impairments to the MVA. It was also noted that...

December 13, 2017

/

tgp-admin

N.L. v. North Blenheim Mutual Insurance Company (16-002606)

The Tribunal initially held that the claimant had failed to apply to the LAT within two years. The claimant's application occurred during the transition between FSCO and the LAT. Executive Chair Lamoureux held that it was an error for the Tribunal not to consider whether the limitation period should be extended. She noted that section...

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

S.H. v. Gore Mutual Insurance Company (17-002632)

The claimant sought entitlement to a medical treatment plan for optometrist services. The insurer denied the treatment plan and relied on an IE assessment which noted the claimant's eye issues were not as a result of the MVA. Adjudicator Avvy Go reviewed the medical evidence and determined that the claimant's eye impairment was a direct...

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

N.R. v. Pembridge Insurance Company (16-003776)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs, ACBs, and medical benefits. Adjudicator Hans rejected all of the claims. In terms of NEBs, the adjudicator wrote that the claimant failed to provide evidence of his pre-accident activities and that without such information, entitlement to NEBs could not be proven. In terms of ACBs, the adjudicator wrote that...

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

M.B. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (16-002325)

The Tribunal initially held that the claimant failed to attend IEs related to post-104 week IRBs. The claimant applied for reconsideration and was successful. Executive Chair Lamoureux held that the IE notice sent to the claimant did not provide sufficient reasons, in particular because the insurer had simply restated its reasons from IEs related to...

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Unica Insurance Inc. (16-002234)

The claimant sought entitlement to income replacement benefits as well as a catastrophic impairment designation. The claimant testified that following the accident she had a blackout while a passenger in another car. She indicated that the blackouts prevented her from working or resuming school studies. The insurer asserted that the blackouts were not as a...

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Travelers Canada (17-002177)

The claimant sought entitlement to a number of medical treatment plans. The insurer asserted a MIG designation. Adjudicator Avvy Go reviewed the medical evidence submitted and concluded that the claimant had failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to remove a MIG designation from her claims. All of the claimed treatment plans were dismissed.

December 12, 2017

/

tgp-admin

M.B. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (16-002325)

The Tribunal initially held that the claimant failed to attend IEs related to post-104 week IRBs. The claimant applied for reconsideration and was successful. Executive Chair Lamoureux held that the IE notice sent to the claimant did not provide sufficient reasons, in particular because the insurer had simply restated its reasons from IEs related to...

December 11, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Rai v. Aviva Insurance (17-002491)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to two treatment plans. Adjudicator Johal concluded that the claimant suffered minor injuries in the accident, and that the claimant's pre-existing conditions did not prevent recovery under the MIG. The adjudicator was critical of the claimant's failure to put any medical evidence before the Tribunal that...

December 11, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Royal Sun Alliance (17-001315)

The claimant sought entitlement to a treatment plan, which the insurer denied due to a MIG determination. The claimant asserted the insurer failed to comply with the Notice provisions of section 38 and that the claimant's pre-existing psychological impairments warranted removal from the MIG. Adjudicator Gemma Harmison determined that the insurer failed to comply with...

December 11, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-001939)

The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs, removal from the MIG, and an in-home assessment. Adjudicator Ferguson rejected all of the claims. In terms of NEBs, the adjudicator wrote that the claimant failed to adduce evidence as to his pre-accident activities and that without a baseline, entitlement to NEBs could not be proven. With regard to...

December 11, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-001822)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and a chronic pain assessment. Adjudicator Hines accepted that the claimant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of her pre-accident employment as a sales representative. She preferred the medical opinions of the claimant's assessors over the insurer's assessors due to inconsistencies and lack of analysis in...

December 8, 2017

/

tgp-admin

R.W.J. v. Aviva Insurance (17-001866)

The claimant sought entitlement to a special award. During the course of the medical management of the matter, the claimant required medical marijuana. The insurer requested that the claim be submitted via an OCF-18. However, Adjudicator Brian Norris noted that under section 38 a treatment plan is not needed if the drug is prescribed by...

December 8, 2017

/

tgp-admin

P.M. v. RBC General Insurance Company (16-001611)

The claimant suffered a finger fracture in the accident. He was new to Canada and did not understand the accident benefits system. He first applied for EI, which was denied; he appealed and lost again. He first applied for accident benefits eight months after the date of loss. The insurer argued that the claimant did...

December 8, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Travelers Insurance (16-003313)

The claimant sought entitlement to a number of medical benefits. Adjudicator Paul Gosio, on review of the medical evidence, determined that the treatment sought was reasonable and necessary.

December 8, 2017

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (16-004375)

This was an amended decision from a previous ruling in which the claimant sought entitlement to a number of medical treatment pans. On review of the medical evidence, Adjudicator Avvy Go determined the treatment plans were reasonable and necessary. Additionally, interest was awarded on the overdue payment of benefits.

Contact Us

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

416.507.1850

smilne@tgplawyers.com

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

Powered by Crow & Pitcher

Subscribe to get TGP’s case summaries straight to your inbox

Subscribe to get TGP’s case summaries straight to your inbox

Contact Us

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

416.507.1850

smilne@tgplawyers.com

© 2020 Thomas Gold Pettingill LLP