The claimant sought a determination that his impairments were outside of the MIG as well as entitlement to medical benefits proposed in ten treatment plans. The claimant argued that he should be removed from the MIG due to chronic pain. When assessing the claim of chronic pain, Adjudicator Ferguson applied the following criteria: i) Does the claimant suffer constant pain – more than simple ongoing or recurrent, intermittent pain? ii) Has the claimant’s pain persisted beyond the normal healing times for the injuries sustained? iii) Is the pain a clinically associated sequelae to minor injuries? iv) Does the claimant’s pain cause functional impairment and disability? Does it significantly disrupt or disable pre-accident activities of daily living? Adjudicator Ferguson found that the claimant failed to meet the onus to prove that he should be removed from the MIG on chronic pain grounds because i) the intermittent pain described in the medical records did not appear to meet the threshold of constant, severe pain; and ii) on balance, he did not find that the evidence illustrated that the claimant’s pain had significantly disrupted or disabled his pre-accident activities. Adjudicator Ferguson found that claimant was within the MIG and dismissed the application.
