In Benc v. Parker, 2012 ABCA 249, David Pick, on behalf of the appellant, appeared before the Court of Appeal in a matter that involves the scheduling of a Certified Examination (“CE”), and specifically what happens if the plaintiff or plaintiff’s counsel do not feel that the appointed examiner has made reasonable efforts to schedule the CE within the time allowed under the MIR. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and determined that the Chambers Judge was wrong in saying that within 30 days of his appointment the examiner did not make reasonable efforts to try to schedule the CE. The Court of Appeal also determined that the wording of the MIR required that reasonable efforts had to have been made within the first 30 days after the appointment to schedule the CE. The CE itself need not be held in that initial 30 day period. Most importantly, the Court of Appeal determined that even though the MIR does not specifically allow it, defence counsel can either reschedule a new CE or defence counsel can bring an application for a determination of whether the plaintiff had a “reasonable excuse” to avoid going to the first scheduled CE. If the court subsequently determines that no reasonable excuse existed the plaintiff will be deemed by s. 10(3) to have a minor injury. If the plaintiff did not have a reasonable excuse defence counsel can start the CE process all over again.