The claimant sought entitlement to NEBs, and seven medical benefits for various treatment and assessments. Adjudicator Watt dismissed all of the claims, holding that the claimant failed to prove entitlement. With regard to the NEB claim, Adjudicator Watt also noted that the claimant was employed at the time of the accident, and that he did not satisfy the element of the NEB test that required that he “”not qualify for an income replacement benefit””. The adjudicator wrote that the applicant should have proceeded with an IRB claim instead. He acknowledged the Court of Appeal’s reasons in Galdamez v Allstate, but wrote that the decision allowing employed persons to claim NEBs was limited to applicants whose job duties did not include mobility requirements, and where the job was not of great importance to the applicant’s pre-accident life.
