The Petitioners sought judicial review of a decision made by the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal (the “WCAT”). In the context of that hearing, the Petitioners objected to the submissions entered by the WCAT. The Court upheld the WCAT’s standing to appear and make the submissions it made in the context of the Petition.

28. April 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Practice and procedure – Judicial review application – Standing in judicial review – Workers Compensation – Worker – definition Buttar v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 548, British Columbia Supreme Court, January 13, 2009, K.M. Ker J. The Petitioner, ...

The Petitioner, Asquini, brought a judicial review application in respect of the decision made by the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT). The WCAT had denied the Petitioner’s appeal of the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB) decision to deny him a loss of earnings pension. The Petitioner argued that the WCAT decision should be quashed for several reasons, including an argument that the vice chair in the WCAT was biased and there were errors in interpreting WCB policies. The Petition was dismissed.

24. March 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Pensions – Eligibility – Legislation – Constitutional issues – Ultra vires – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Bias Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Asquini v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2009] B.C.J. No. 89, British Columbia Supreme ...

The Saskatchewan Workers’ Compensation Board decision declining jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim made by an employee of the University of Saskatchewan against the University for harassment was quashed by the Court of Appeal and the matter referred back to the Board. It was incumbent on the Board to examine the grievance advanced by way of arbitration and determine whether and to what extent that claim was a claim for a workplace injury that, if established, would entitle the grievor to compensation under the Workers’ Compensation Act, S.S. 1979, c. W-17.1. The Board needed to consider not only the fact that the grievor’s claim under the Act was denied, but the basis upon which it was denied. The question is whether the injury claimed falls within the jurisdiction of the Board, not whether the claimant was successful in proving the claim to the Board.

24. March 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Jurisdiction – Labour law – Arbitration – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter University of Saskatchewan v. Workers’ Compensation Board of Saskatchewan, [2009] S.J. No. 76, 2009 SKCA 17, Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, February 6, 2009, ...

WCB was required to disclose to a newspaper, the Halifax Herald Ltd., names of the 25 employers with highest employee injury incidence and answer related questions. While such disclosure would reveal labour relations information, it would not reveal information supplied by the employers, or if it did, the information was not information supplied in confidence. Disclosure could not reasonably be expected to significantly harm the employers’ competitive position or result in similar information no longer being supplied to the WCB. The disclosure of employers’ names would not constitute an unreasonable invasion of privacy of the injured workers and was, in all the circumstances, in the public interest.

23. December 2008 0
Administrative law – Workers Compensation Board – Disclosure of third party records – Confidentiality – Freedom of information and protection of privacy – Invasion of personal privacy – Personal information – definition – Judicial review – Disclosure – Compliance with legislation – Public interest Halifax Herald Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2008] N.S.J. ...

Petro-Canada was successful in its application for judicial review of a decision made by a Workers’ Compensation Board (“WCB”) Review Officer finding that it had obligations as an “employer” under section 115 of the Workers Compensation Act., R.S.B.C. 1996 c. 492 (the “Act”) to ensure the health and safety of workers employed by the operators of two of its service stations.

23. September 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Employer – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Compliance with legislation Petro-Canada v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2008] B.C.J. No. 1366, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 18, 2008, T.J. Melnick J Petro-Canada is engaged in the ...

The appeal by Chauvet from the dismissal of his application for judicial review of the decision of the Appeals Commission of the Workers’ Compensation Board was dismissed where the Court found that the Appeals Commission’s conclusion that Chauvet was working as a director and not a worker at the time of the accident was not patently unreasonable

26. June 2008 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Worker – definition – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Chauvet v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board, Appeals Commission), [2007] A.J. No. 493, Alberta Court of Appeal, May 7, 2007, E. McFadyen, R. Berger and K. Ritter JJ.A. Chauvet was sole owner and ...

The widow of Edward Schulmeister (the “Petitioner”) was successful in obtaining judicial review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribual (“WCAT”) where the Court found that the WCAT’s decision was patently unreasonable pursuant to s. 58(3)(d) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, S.B.C. 2004, c. 45 as the Panel failed to take the requisite statutory requirements into account

26. December 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Survivor benefits – Significant cause of death – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Schulmeister v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2007] B.C.J. No. 2321, British Columbia Supreme Court, October 29, 2007, C.E. Hinkson J. In 1994, Mr. Schulmeister was seriously injured ...

The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission (“WCA”) was patently unreasonable in its finding as to when a worker’s accident ceased to be the cause of the worker’s injury. Workers’ Compensation Policy ADJ-39 is properly interpreted as to only require a disability to be the result of an emotional reaction, not that the injury be an emotional reaction. WCA’s analysis was unreasonable because it limited coverage by relying on factors that the Policy requires to be used to extend coverage.

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Psychological injury – employment related – Test – Benefits – Judicial review – Evidence – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Shuchuk v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board, Appeals Commission), [2007] A.J. No. 725, Alberta Court of Appeal, July 10, ...

When assessing WCB spousal survivorship pension entitlement, the Workers’ Compensation Board has jurisdiction to determine whether a person was an “employee” under the Government Employees Compensation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. G-5 (the “GECA”)

28. August 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Worker – definition – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Compliance with legislation – Privative clauses – Standard of review – Correctness Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Luo, [2007] B.C.J. No. 1478, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 4, 2007, Meiklem J. An ...

O’Donnell was successful in her application for judicial review of a Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal decision finding that O’Donnell did not suffer a work-related disability as a result of a disciplinary suspension and termination of her employment

26. June 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Judicial review O’Donnell (Re), [2007] Y.J. No. 9, Yukon Territory Supreme Court, January 19, 2007, Gower J. O’Donnell was employed with the government and was suspended when inconsistencies in the management of her files was noted. O’Donnell claimed that she was ...