The claimant sought reconsideration of the Tribunal’s decision that his injuries fell under the MIG. The Tribunal had concluded that the claimant suffered chronic pain, but that it was “clinically associated sequelae” of the initial “minor injury.” Executive Chair Lamoureux reversed the Tribunal’s decision. She held that the Tribunal’s finding that the claimant suffered from chronic pain was sufficient to deem his impairment more serious than a “minor injury.” She also wrote that chronic pain syndrome could not be “clinically associated sequelae” falling under the MIG. Executive Chair Lamoureux awarded four treatment plans that were initially denied by the Tribunal based on the claimant’s injuries falling within the MIG.
Menu