The Petitioner, Lavigne, unsuccessfully brought an application for judicial review in respect of a reconsideration decision of the Respondent’s Appeal Tribunal, which related to the calculation of her long-term disability pay

27. April 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Average earnings – method of calculation – Judicial review – Evidence – Natural justice – Hearings – Failure to hold a hearing Lavigne v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2010] B.C.J. No. 447, 2010 BCSC 341, British Columbia Supreme Court, January ...

The Court allowed a petition for judicial review of two decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal, which had denied compensation to the Petitioner for psychological problems he claimed were a consequence of a prior back injury. The Court found that the Appeal Tribunal had made a patently unreasonable error by applying an incorrect legal test in determining whether the Petitioner’s psychological problems were compensable.

26. January 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Psychological injury – employment related – Test – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Chima v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 2281, 2009 BCSC 1574, British Columbia ...

The Applicant, Schroder, successfully sought judicial review of the Respondent Board’s decision to discontinue his disability benefits

24. November 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Policies – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Schroder v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2009] A.J. No. 1109, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, October 9, 2009, M.T. Moreau J. The Applicant Worker injured ...

The Court of Appeal set aside a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission, which had denied the appellant pension benefits, following her estranged husband’s death in a work-related accident, on the basis that the appellant and her child were not “dependants”. The Court of Appeal found that the Commission had failed to apply the correct test with respect to whether the appellant and her child were “dependents”.

27. October 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Dependant – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Correctness – Reasonableness simpliciter – Interpretation of legislation – Evidence – Test Elgie v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission), [2009] A.J. No. 899, Alberta Court of Appeal, ...

The Appellant Board successfully appealed the decision of the Chambers judge, which had overturned the Board’s review decision that found the Respondent Petro-Canada was not an employer, within the meaning of the Workers’ Compensation Act, in respect of a safety investigation

27. October 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Employer – definition – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Petro-Canada v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2009] B.C.J. No. 1842, British Columbia Court of Appeal, September 16, 2009, M.V. Newbury, S.D. ...

The appeal by an injured worker (“Young”) from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) limiting his entitlement to extended earnings replacement benefits was dismissed where the Court found that the Tribunal had evidence upon which to conclude that Young was capable of working after his initial accident in 1997, despite later becoming unable to work because of disk herniation

26. May 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Loss of earnings – Transferable skills – Test – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation Young v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2009] N.S.J. No. 157, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, April 15, 2009, J.W.S. ...

The appeal by a worker (“Plesner”) from a judicial review of his claim for workers’ compensation was allowed where the Court found that provisions and policies under the Workers’ Compensation Act R.S.B.C. 1996 c.492 (the “Act”), breached his Section 15(1) Charter rights as they require a worker to meet a significantly higher causation threshold for a purely mental work-related injury than required for those who suffer purely physical workplace injuries

26. May 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Workers compensation – Benefits – Traumatic event – Psychological injury – employment related – Validity and application of policies – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Remedies – Charter relief Plesner v. British Columbia (Hydro and ...

The application by a widow of a deceased worker for judicial review of the Workers’ Compensation Board’s decision refusing to set aside an amount payable to the widow under s. 83(5) of the Workers’ Compensation Act was dismissed for delay

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Judicial review – Delay Holowachuk v. Saskatchewan (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2009] S.J. No. 109, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, February 12, 2009, R.C. Mills J. A widow (“Holowachuk”) applied for judicial review of the Board’s decision refusing to ...

The Appeal by an employer (“Fundy Linen”) from the decision of the Appeals Tribunal allowing an injured employee’s claim to obtain barrier-free housing was allowed due to bias and the matter was remitted to the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (the “Commission”)

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Discretion of court – Workers compensation – Benefits – Housing – Interpretation of legislation – Judicial review – Witnesses – Member of Legislative Assembly – Bias – Waiver of claim for bias Fundy Linen Service Inc. v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and ...

The Court of Appeal allowed an Appeal of a decision of the B.C. Supreme Court, which had found that a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal, that the Appellant was injured in the course of his employment, was patently unreasonable. In making its finding, the Court of Appeal found that the B.C. Legislature had not, by enacting sections 58 and 59 of the Administrative Tribunal’s Act, stepped outside its legislative competence and infringed on a constitutional guarantee of judicial review for the superior courts. Moreover, the effect of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick was not to change the meaning of patently unreasonable. The application judge, while referring to the correct approach to factual issues, impermissibly weighed the evidence and moved outside the definition of patently unreasonable.

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Evidence Manz v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 464, British ...