BC Supreme Court Finds Botox Covered Under ICBC's Part 7 Benefits
It is not uncommon for physicians to occasionally prescribe Botox Injections to treat symptoms of pain following motor vehicle collisions. The Botox itself is not covered by the BC Medical Service Plan and people often turn to ICBC for funding of this expense. Two recent decisions have addressed whether ICBC is obliged to fund Botox therapy when prescribed by a physician.
In 2008 Mr. Justice Macaulay provided reasons for judgement (Tiessen v. ICBC) finding that Botox is indeed a covered benefit under ICBC’s No-Fault Plan. The Court provided the following reasons:
 Counsel for ICBC seeks to impose too high a standard for proving that a recommended treatment is necessary. I am satisfied that the treatment is necessary in the sense that the plaintiff needs short and long term pain relief for his lower back. While it is impossible to predict that this particular treatment will succeed, it is nonetheless, on the evidence before me, a necessary physical treatment within the meaning of the section.
 There is no evidence to suggest that the proposed cost of the staged treatment is unreasonable. The fact that the particular treatment is not covered by MSP does not establish that the cost is unreasonable.
 I am persuaded that the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that he is an insured person to be benefited pursuant to Part 7 of the Regulations and a further declaration that he is entitled to receive medical rehabilitative benefits pursuant to the contract of insurance with the defendant under Policy Number 639 DER for the cost of Botox injections as recommended by Dr. Quartly.
Further reasons for judgement were released today by the BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, confirming that Botox is a benefit covered under Part 7.
In today’s case (Plensky v. Di Biase) the Plaintiff was injured in a 2004 motor vehicle collision. A jury awarded the Plaintiff damages including just over $60,000 for the cost of her future medical care. The court was then asked to reduce the award to take into account the future expenses that were covered directly by the Plaintiff’s Part 7 Benefits to avoid “double recovery” (You can click here to read more about this topic). Madam Justice Ross ultimately made a modest deduction to the Jury’s award. Part of the deduction reflected the cost of future Botox injections which the Court accepted was a responsibility of ICBC’s under the Plaintiff’s Part 7 Benefits.
Today’s case coupled with Mr. Justice Macaulay’s 2008 decision make it clear that Botox can be covered under people’s own policies of ICBC Insurance.
bc injury law, botox, Madam Justice Ross, Mr. Justice Macaulay, no-fault benefits, Part 7 benefits, Plensky v. Di Biase, tiessen v. icbc