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 the MIG, the adjudicator wrote that the claimant failed to provide medical evidence proving that she suffered psychological injuries or chronic pain, or submit evidence that her pre-existing diabetes, arthritis, and obesity would prevent her from achieving maximal recovery under the MIG.