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.

July 6, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Unifund Assurance Company (17-008769)

The claimant sought disclosure of any surveillance in the insurer's possession, whether it intended on relying upon it or not. Adjudicator Grieves held that while any surveillance in the insurer's possession was relevant, it was not producible if litigation privilege would apply to it (i.e. if it was obtained after the LAT dispute was commenced...

July 3, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (17-006967)

The claimant sought a determination that her impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in two treatment plans. Adjudicator Parish found that the claimant was removed from the MIG as a result of the insurer's failure to comply with the "medical and all other reasons" requirement in s....

June 29, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v Aviva Insurance Canada (16-003638)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG, entitlement to NEBs, nine disputed treatment plans, interest, costs, and a special award. Adjudicator Gosio concluded that the claimant's psychological injuries warranted treatment outside of the MIG, and approved one of the treatment plans sought. However, Adjudicator Gosio held that the claimant was not entitled to NEBs, payment...

June 29, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v Wawanesa (17-004541)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG, entitlement to medical benefits, and interest. The claimant argued that pre-existing back degenerative changes, in conjunction with his alleged chronic pain, warranted treatment outside of the MIG. The claimant further claimed that he had incurred significant treatment expenses to enable him to return to employment, and relied on...

June 29, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Z.V. v Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006874)

The claimant sought treatment outside of the MIG, entitlement to a disputed chiropractic treatment plan, a special award, and interest. The claimant argued that she had been removed from the MIG as the insurer had approved previous treatment plans above the MIG limits. The insurer, however, claimed that these approvals were an administrative error, and...

June 29, 2018

/

tgp-admin

R.K. v. Aviva Insurance Company (17-006651)

The claimant sought payment of attendant care benefits. The insurer did not dispute that services were reasonable and necessary, but argued that the claimant had not incurred such expenses. The claimant refused to provide answers to questions regarding the services during an examination under oath, and the invoices proving receipt of the services was vague...

June 29, 2018

/

tgp-admin

S.K. v. Aviva Insurance Company (17-006866)

The claimant sought payment of attendant care benefits. The insurer did not dispute that services were reasonable and necessary, but argued that the claimant had not incurred such expenses. The claimant refused to provide answers to questions regarding the services during an examination under oath, and the invoices proving receipt of the services was vague...

June 28, 2018

/

tgp-admin

S.H. v Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (17-006504)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and interest. The insurer raised a third issue at the hearing, as to whether the claimant had complied with a production order. The claimant argued that she was entitled to IRBs, as she continued to receive treatment for her accident-related injuries. Adjudicator Boyce disagreed, noting that the test for...

June 28, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005950)

The claimant sought entitlement to IRBs and three medical benefits. Adjudicator Go dismissed all of the claims other than the claimed psychological assessment. She held that there was insufficient information to support objective limitations or restrictions to support the IRB claim, and the claimant had not provided sufficient information to quantify the IRB even if...

June 27, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v The Guarantee Company of North America (17-006422)

The claimant sought entitlement to a treatment plan for physiotherapy services, and interest. Vice-Chair Flude preferred the evidence of the claimant's physiotherapist to that of the respondent's neurologist, and awarded the disputed treatment plan and interest.

June 27, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v Aviva Insurance Canada (16-005271)

The Tribunal was asked to determine whether, after the claimant withdrew an application prior to a hearing, the respondent was entitled to costs, and whether the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to hear a motion for costs. Adjudicator Norris determined that the Tribunal did have the jurisdiction to hear the respondent's request for costs, as the...

June 27, 2018

/

tgp-admin

B.H. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (17-006692)

The claimant sought entitlement to the cost of an accounting report and interest on IRBs. The insurer had paid IRBs at a lower rate and then increased the weekly IRB payment upon receipt of further information. Adjudicator Ferguson held that the insurer was not required to pay for the accounting report because the claimant was...

June 25, 2018

/

tgp-admin

U.S. v. Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company (17-007003)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG and entitlement to benefits proposed in five treatment plans. Adjudicator Lake found that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG and that the treatment plans in dispute were not payable as the MIG limits had been exhausted.

June 25, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. TTC Insurance Company Limited (17-004391)

The claimant sought entitlement to various medical benefits for physical therapy, a psychological assessment, and psychological therapy. Adjudicator Ferguson denied the claims for physical therapy because the claimant had not demonstrated that her pain complaints were related to the accident. He awarded the $200 form fee related to the psychological assessment, and awarded the remainder...

June 21, 2018

/

tgp-admin

F.A. v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-005508)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in three treatment plans. The claimant argued that he should be removed from the MIG due to chronic pain and pre-existing injuries from a previous motor vehicle accident. Adjudicator Maleki-Yazdi held that for chronic...

June 21, 2018

/

tgp-admin

D.V. v. Unifund Assurance Company (17-006637)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in one treatment plan. The claimant argued that he should be removed from the MIG due to chronic pain. The parties agreed that chronic pain as a result of the accident may remove a...

June 20, 2018

/

tgp-admin

M.R.A. v. Intact Insurance Company (17-006106)

The insurer approved the disputed treatment plans before the hearing date. The claimant sought payment of interest. Adjudicator Sewrattan concluded that interest was payable because the payment for treatment was overdue.

June 20, 2018

/

tgp-admin

Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006124)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to various treatment plans, attendant care benefits, and non-earner benefits. Adjudicator Ferguson held that the claimant's injuries fell within the MIG and that she was not entitled to NEBs. The claimant failed to demonstrate why alleged pre-existing conditions or lingering pain should remove her from the...

June 18, 2018

/

tgp-admin

G.T. v. Allstate Insurance Company (17-005131)

The claimant sought removal from the MIG and entitlement to various treatment plans. Adjudicator Mazerolle denied the claims. He held that the claimant failed to explain why the alleged pre-existing conditions would prevent recovery under the MIG, and that she failed to explain why the claimant's pain was not sequelae of a minor injury.

June 18, 2018

/

tgp-admin

The Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006182)

The claimant sought a determination that her impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in six treatment plans. The claimant argued that she should be removed from the MIG due to accident-related psychological impairments and chronic pain. Adjudicator Maleki-Yazdi held that for chronic pain to fall outside of...

June 18, 2018

/

tgp-admin

The Applicant v. Aviva Insurance Canada (17-006136)

The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in ten treatment plans. The claimant argued that he should be removed from the MIG due to chronic pain. When assessing the claim of chronic pain, Adjudicator Ferguson applied the following criteria: i) Does...

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