CRT Green Lights Multiple Efforts For Permanet Impairment Applications
I’ve written previously about BC’s new ‘permanent impairment’ regulation. A crude meat chart giving nominal payments to permanently inured BC crash victims in the no-fault era. I hate using this crude language but if you look at the profoundlyhttps://bc-injury-law.com/category/icbc-permanent-impairment-regulation/ low numbers I imagine you will agree.
It is not always clear when an injury is permanent. Some health care practitioners may express optimism when prognosticating an injury’s fate while others may be quicker to conclude things are as good as they will get. Interesting reasons for judgement were recently published by BC’s Civil Resolution Tribunal noting that if an applicant fails in a claim for a permanent impairment decision because the prognosis is premature nothing precludes them from bringing the same claim in the future.
In the recent case (Bate v. ICBC) the self represented litigant applied for permanent impairment damages but the claim was dismissed with the Tribunal noting that on a balance of probabilities they failed to prove their injuries were indeed permanent. The Tribunal went on to note though that the failed application was not a barrier to a further application dealing with the same injury in the future. Specifically the Tribunal noted as follows:
As noted, Mr. Bate, in order to successfully claim for permanent impairment compensation, must show that it is more likely than not that his injuries are “permanent” as defined by section 10(1) of the PIR. I find he has not done so. So, I dismiss his claim for permanent impairment compensation at this time. Nothing in this decision prevents Mr. Bate from reapplying for permanent impairment compensation if and when his injuries become permanent.