Common Occupational Disability Tests and Case Law References: An Ontario MVA perspective on interpretation and best practice methodology supporting a holistic model, Part I of III (Pre-104 IRB).

This three-part paper presents practical holistic models of determining impairment and occupational disability with respect to common "own occupation" and "any occupation" definitions. The models consider physical, emotional and cognitive impairments in unison, and draw upon case law support for empirically based functional assessment of secondary cognitive symptoms arising from psychological conditions, including chronic pain disorders. Case law is presented, primarily in the context of Ontario motor vehicle accident legislation, to demonstrate how triers of fact have addressed occupational disability in the context of chronic pain; and interpreted the "own occupation" and "any occupation" definitions. In interpreting the definitions of "own occupation" and "any occupation", courts have considered various concepts, such as: work as an integrated whole, competitive productivity, demonstrated job performance vs. employment, work adaptation relative to impairment stability, suitable work, retraining considerations, self-employment, and remuneration/socio-economic status. The first segment of the paper reviews the above concepts largely in the context of pre-104 Income Replacement Benefit (IRB) entitlement, while the second segment focuses on post-104 IRB entitlement. In the final segment, the paper presents a critical evaluation of computerized transferable skills analysis (TSAs) in the occupational disability context. By contrast, support is offered for the notion that (neuro) psychovocational assessments and situational work assessments should play a key role in "own occupation" disability determination, even where specific vocational rehabilitation/retraining recommendations are not requested by the referral source (e.g., insurer disability examination).