Henry v. Gore Mutual is the first court decision to address the issue since the SABS changed the definition of “incurred expense” September 1, 2010.
Justice Ray found that as long as a family member providing attendant care sustains “an” economic loss, regardless of the amount of the loss, presuming the injured person pays, promises to or is obliged to pay for the attendant care, the insurer must pay “all reasonable and necessary attendant care”.
In this case the actual economic loss was just over $2,000.00 per month. The Court found that test of “economic loss” was a threshold finding for there to be an “incurred expense”, “but is not intended as a means of calculating the quantum of the incurred expense”.
Click here for a copy of the decision. Please see our next Accident Benefit Reporter for an article discussing the impact of the decisions and other attendant care issues.
Summary by: David F. MacDonald & Stacey L. Stevens.