ARTICLE
20 March 2017

Credibility Is Vital

In MK v Dumfries Mutual, LAT adjudicator Jeanie Theoharis stated that "in arbitration hearings an Applicant's credibility is vital, particularly where there are competing medical opinions".
Canada Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

In MK v Dumfries Mutual, LAT adjudicator Jeanie Theoharis stated that "in arbitration hearings an Applicant's credibility is vital, particularly where there are competing medical opinions". 

The adjudicator looked closely at the Applicant's self-reports, surveillance, the clinical notes and records of the Applicant's treating doctors and the content and quality of assessor's reports for internal consistency and consistency with known facts. The adjudicator found there was a contradiction between surveillance and the statement given by the Applicant; that the Applicant's psychological assessment was unreliable; and, that the Applicant's self-reports were not supported by the records of her treating doctors.

Ultimately the adjudicator held that the Applicant's injuries fall within the Minor Injury Guideline and that she is not entitled to income replacement benefits.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

ARTICLE
20 March 2017

Credibility Is Vital

Canada Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Contributor
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More