The claimant appealed the Tribunal’s decision that she was not permitted to rescind a 2000 settlement for two 1996 accidents. The Tribunal initially held that the claimant could not rescind the settlements because she had not paid back the settlement, as required by the Settlement Regulation. Following the claimant’s repayment of the settlement, the Tribunal reconsidered the validity of the settlement, and concluded that the SDN provided sufficient information to the claimant regarding attendant care benefits and housekeeping benefits, and that such information allowed the claimant to make an informed decision. The Tribunal held that the insurer was not required to provide a commuted value for these benefits because they had not been claimed. The Court dismissed the appeal, concluding that the Tribunal correctly applied the law relating to settlements and the requirements of the SDN. Because the claimant had not applied for attendant care or housekeeping prior to the settlement, the lack of information regarding the commuted value could not have reasonably affected the claimant’s decision to settle her claims.
