The Fraser Health Authority was successful on judicial review of a decision of the British Columbia Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) whereby WCAT held that there was a causal link between breast cancer suffered by three respondents working for the Health Authority and their employment

21. March 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Occupational disease – Expert evidence – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Fraser Health Authority v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2013] B.C.J. No. 605, 2013 BCSC 524, British Columbia Supreme Court, March 28, ...

The appellant employer successfully appealed a decision of the provincial Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission Appeals Tribunal, which had set aside a decision of the provincial Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission dismissing the respondent employee’s claim for compensation benefits for “gradual onset stress.”

26. February 2013 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Investigations – Workers compensation – Government employees – Federal and provincial legislation – Psychological injury – employment related – Test – Stress claims Robichaud v. Canada (Attorney General), [2013] N.B.J. No. 8, 2013 NBCA 1, New Brunswick Court of Appeal, January 10, 2013, ...

The appellants appealed from a judicial review decision that upheld a tribunal finding that because a worker’s claim was not compensable under the legislation, the claim did not arise out of and in the course of employment. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the tribunal’s interpretation imposed a construction that was contrary to the legislative intent and at odds with the factual realities of the situation. The court substituted its own determination on the substance of the claim.

27. November 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – In and out of the course of employment – Statutory provisions – Psychological injury – Stress claims – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Legislative intent – Standard of ...

The Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal’s (“WCAT”) interpretation of its policy, which resulted in a decision not to use class average wages to calculate the appellant worker’s permanent disability pension benefits, was found by the Court of Appeal not to be patently unreasonable. There was nothing in the WCAT reasons to suggest that the policy could never apply to migrants from other provinces or to workers whose recent actual earnings reflected their choices about where to work or what kind of job to take. Rather, the reasons disclosed a finding that the policy did not apply to the appellant given the particular facts before the WCAT. Interpretation of Board policy fell within WCAT’s exclusive jurisdiction and lay at the heart of the WCAT’s specialized function and expertise on appeal. Courts in judicial review proceedings are required to show deference and interfere only when an interpretation is patently unreasonable. In this case, WCAT’s interpretation of the policy turned on recognizing the purpose of the policy to protect against inequitable use of actual earnings where those earnings are not sufficient to allow a determination of what best represents the worker’s long-term loss of earnings in circumstances where there was an element of unfairness in using past earnings rather than a class average, i.e. where a worker’s income would be almost certain to increase substantially. Such an interpretation was not “clearly irrational” nor did it fail to accord with reason or border on the absurd. As a result, this ground of appeal was dismissed.

25. September 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Average earnings – method of calculation – Policies – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Judicial review – Evidence – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Phillips v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2012] B.C.J. ...

A man who worked in mining operations of Xstrata Canada Corporation (“Xstrata”) between 1979 and 1996 (“LeBlanc”) was successful on appeal from a decision of the Appeal Tribunal of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (“Appeals Tribunal”) for reimbursement of medical treatment related to heavy metals detected in his blood

24. July 2012 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Policies – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Hearings – Fairness  – Conduct of hearings – Independent expert – Judicial review – Witnesses – Evidence – Procedural requirements and fairness LeBlanc v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission), [2012] N.B.J. No. 199, 2012 NBCA 49, New Brunswick Court of ...

The Workers Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) appealed a decision, which allowed the Respondent’s application for a judicial review of compensation entitlement and invalidating a policy. The respondent cross-appealed the judicial review decision on the basis of the invalidation of policy.

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Policies – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Statutory provisions – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Jurisdiction of court Jozipovic v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2012] B.C.J. No. 801, 2012 BCCA 174, ...

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal of the Worker’s Compensation Board and restored its decision to compensate an injured worker based on calculations made under a new policy implemented under the Workers’ Compensation Act

Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers Compensation – Benefits – Statutory provisions – Policies – Validity and application of policies and guidelines – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Mellor v. Saskatchewan (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2012] S.J. No. 57, 2012 SKCA ...

The Court set aside the decision of the Chambers judge which held that a WCB Medical Review Panel’s decision was unreasonable and dismissed the respondent’s petition for judicial review

25. October 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers Compensation Boards – Workers compensation – Benefits – Psychological injury – employment related – Hearings – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Evidence Bagri v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Board), [2011] B.C.J. No. 1691, 2011 BCCA 368, British Columbia Court of Appeal, September 8, ...

The applicant, Mr. St. Cyr, sought judicial review of a 2010 decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Commission (“Appeals Commission”) which modified an earlier decision it had reached in 2008 regarding the applicant’s disability benefits. The 2008 decision had curtailed the disability benefits which the Workers’ Compensation Board had awarded the applicant, both by limiting the salary used to calculate his earning capacity and the timeframe within which he was eligible for total and partial disability benefits. In March 2009, the applicant successfully sought reconsideration of the 2008 decision, which the Appeals Commission vacated because the panel failed to apply s.63 of the Workers’ Compensation Act (the “Act”) in rendering a decision on non-compensable conditions.

23. August 2011 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Workers compensation Appeals Commission – Workers compensation – Benefits – Average earnings – method of calculation – Judicial review – Estoppel and res judicata – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter St. Cyr v. Alberta (Worker’s Compensation Board), [2011] ...

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismisses an application for judicial review, holding that the Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal did not fetter its discretion by relying on a policy to interpret the applicable legislation and that the Tribunal’s decision was not patently unreasonable

Administrative law – Workers Compensation – Disability – Unreasonableness Phillips v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), [2011] B.C.J. No. 835, 2011 BCSC 576, British Columbia Supreme Court, May 3, 2011, P. Rogers J. The petitioner, Glynis Phillips, seeks an order setting aside a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (“WCAT”). The sole issue ...