The claimant appealed the Tribunal’s decision that he was not an insured person under the Security National policy and was therefore not entitled to accident benefits. The claimant suffered a catastrophic impairment when he was injured in an uninsured vehicle. He applied to Security National for accident benefits under a policy issued to his aunt and uncle on the basis that he was a dependant. Security National commenced a priority arbitration against the Fund. In the interim, Security National adjusted the claim, and certain benefits were denied. When a LAT dispute was commenced, Security National requested a preliminary issue hearing on whether the claimant was an insured person. The Tribunal held that the claimant was not an insured person and dismissed the LAT application. The claimant appealed, arguing that the Tribunal should not have heard the preliminary issue decision while the priority dispute was pending. The Court agreed and reversed the Tribunal’s decision. The Court held that it was an abuse of process to determine the insured person issue while the priority dispute was pending. The Tribunal failed to consider the interplay between a priority dispute and the claimant’s entitlement to benefits, and the importance of the “pay pending dispute” aspect of the SABS and the priority rules. The Tribunal’s approach left the catastrophically injured claimant without benefits, even though he was entitled to receive the benefits from one of the two insurers involved in the priority dispute.
