In the recent decision of Dippel v. Kraus, 2016 BCSC 2238, the court denied ICBC’s request for an Independent Medical Examination with a Physiatrist on the basis that the plaintiff had already been examined by an ICBC appointed Orthopaedic Surgeon. The court said:
 THE COURT: This is an application by the defendant for the plaintiff to attend at the defendant's medical examination with Dr. Gabriel Hirsch, a physiatrist, on Monday next week.
 Dr. Richardson, as an orthopedic surgeon, is a different speciality from Dr. Hirsch, who is a physiatrist; however, it is established by case law and not disputed that there is significant overlap between these two specialties.
 In the absence of any evidence that Dr. Richardson would not be able to provide the evidence as to the plaintiff's rehabilitation, or alternatively any evidence from Dr. Hirsch as to what he could bring to the analysis, or that he could opine on something that Dr. Richardson could not, I am unable to conclude that the defendant has established on the evidence that a second medical examination with Dr. Hirsch is required in these circumstances.
The full text of the decision can be found here: http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc2238/2016bcsc2238.html?resultIndex=1