The Court of Appeal overturned a WCAT Commissioner’s decision entitling a worker to workers’ compensation benefits. The Court found that the WCAT Commissioner made a series of patently unreasonable findings with respect to the medical evidence. The Court held that the conclusions regarding the medical expert opinion that the Commissioner made were directly contradicted by the physicians in their reports. The Court found that the Commissioner’s mistakes in understanding, interpreting, describing and applying the medical evidence was central to the Tribunal’s reasoning and amounted to errors of law requiring the Court of Appeal’s intervention.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Judicial review – Evidence Metropolitan Entertainment Group v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2007] N.S.J. No. 88, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, March 6, 2007, E.A. Roscoe, T.A. Cromwell and J.W.S. Saunders JJ.A. The employer appealed a decision from the Workers’ ...

An employer (“Nabors”) was unsuccessful in appealing a Queen’s Bench decision dismissing an appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board (“WCB”) Appeals Commission enabling a worker’s spouse to receive survivor benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act (the “Act”)

23. January 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – In and out of the course of employment – Judicial review – Appeals – Parties – Standing – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter – Patent unreasonableness Nabors Canada LP v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission), [2006] A.J. No. 1507, ...

The appeal by Page from a decision of the Appeals Tribunal of the Workplace, Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of New Brunswick (the “Commission”) was allowed where the Court found that the Appeals Tribunal made a palpable and overriding error in upholding the Commission’s decision to reopen and reject Page’s claim for benefits

28. November 2006 0
Administrative law – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial Review – Statutory provisions – Evidence – Jurisdiction Page v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission), [2006] N.B.J. No. 394, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, September 21, 2006, W.S. Turnbull, J.Z. Daigle and J.T. Robertson JJ.A. ...

Geronazzo’s application for judicial review of the dismissal of his application for an extension of the 90-day limit to apply for a review of a Workers’ Compensation Board (the “Board”) decision rejecting his claim for benefits was allowed where the Court held that the decision that Geronazzo had failed to show that he intended to appeal during the period was patently unreasonable

26. September 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Benefits – Judicial review – Appeals – Limitations – Extension of time Geronazzo v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2006] B.C.J. No. 1647, British Columbia Supreme Court, July 13, 2006, Rogers J. Geronazzo’s claim for Workers’ Compensation benefits due to a back injury was ...

The Court quashed a policy decision of the Workers Compensation Board (“WCB”) Board of Directors (“BOD”) on the ground that it made a patently unreasonable interpretation of the word “recurrence” to include deterioration

27. June 2006 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Recurrence vs. deterioration – Validity and application of policies – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Interpretation of legislation – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Cowburn v. British Columbia (Worker’s Compensation Board), [2006] B.C.J. No. 1020, British Columbia ...

The Court allowed an appeal of a company that had sought redress from the Workers’ Compensation Board and the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal after it had lost considerable money over the years after being assigned an incorrect classification under the Act. The WCB and WCAT had erred in concluding that they did not have the discretion to contemplate a calculation of the Appellant’s over-assessment to a date earlier than the year in which the correction was made.

24. January 2006 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Industry classification – Assessment – Statutory interpretation – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Correctness Thermo Dynamics Ltd. v. Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal), [2005] N.S.J. No 475, Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, November 23, 2005, E.A. Roscoe, ...

An employee of Weyerhauser (“Mr. Jones”) was successful in his appeal from a decision dismissing his application for judicial review of a decision denying his claim for a loss of earnings pension through the Workers’ Compensation Board

22. November 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Judicial review – Jurisdiction – Standard of review of appellate court – Privative clauses – Delegated authority – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Remedies – Mandamus – Certiorari Jones v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2005] B.C.J. No. ...

The Court dismissed the Workers’ Compensation Board’s appeal of a reviewing judge’s decision upholding a decision of the Appeals Commission. The privative clause and the statutory appeal provision limited the right of appeal from a decision by the Appeals Commission to pure questions of law. The reviewing judge did not err in finding that the Appeals Commission decision could rely on new medical evidence since strict rules of evidence did not apply to a hearing.

25. October 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Procedural fairness – Statutory provisions – Privative clauses – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Hearings – Rules of evidence – Fresh evidence – Admissibility – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Appeals Commission, [2005] A.J. No. ...

The Workers’ Compensation Board appealed the decision of the Appeals Commission (the “AC”) which determined that while the deceased was a director of the lumber corporation at the time of the accident, at the time of his death he was engaged in the activities of a “worker”. The court confirmed the AC’s decision and dismissed the appeal.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Worker – Definition – Director of corporation – Interpretation of legislation – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Appeals – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Board, Appeals Commission), [2005] A.J. No. 894, Alberta Court of ...

The Applicant both appealed and applied for judicial review of a decision of the Appeals Commission of the Alberta Workers’ Compensation Board (the “AC”) upholding a decision of the Claims Services Review Committee (the “CSRC”) which denied the Applicant further benefits for a work related injury. The appeal was dismissed, and a judicial review of the decision of the AC was denied on the basis that even though the AC had erred in holding that it could not review jurisdictional issues regarding the CSRC, the de novo hearing before the AC was an adequate alternative remedy to sending the matter back to the CSRC for a rehearing and the decision of the AC that the Applicant was not entitled to further benefits was reasonable.

27. September 2005 0
Administrative law – Workers compensation – Benefits – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Appeals – Jurisdiction to hear – Judicial review – Judicial review application – Natural justice – Remedies – Alternative remedies Martinson v. Alberta (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission), [2005] A.J. No. 896, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, July 15, 2005, Macklin ...