Private MRI Disbursement Disallowed Due To Lack of Evidence of Urgency
Adding to this site’s¬†arcived decisions addressing the recovery of private MRI costs as a disbursement, reasons for judgement were released recently by the BC Supreme Court, Victoria Registry, disallowing such a claim.
In the recent case (Cooknell v. Quinn) the parties could not agree on the reasonableness of a variety of disbursement items including a privately funded MRI. ¬†In rejecting this item Master Bouck held that the claim must fail as there was no evidence supporting the need for a privately funded MRI. ¬†Master Bouck provided the following reasons:
¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†Dealing firstly with the MRI disbursement, the facts of this case are somewhat analogous to those described by then Registrar Blok in¬†Phelan v. Newcombe.
¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†Although Dr. Smith did recommend an MRI in this case (it is not clear exactly when), there is no explanation offered for proceeding to a private clinic when a publicly funded scan was available — or at least no evidence to suggest that such a process was unavailable. As the MRI charge is disallowed on this basis, I do not need to consider whether such an investigation was necessary or proper.