The City of Calgary was successful in having the Court set aside the decision of the Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission where the Court found that the Chief Commissioner’s decision was unreasonable as it compared the situation of the disabled complainant (“Halfyard”) with other groups of employees not contemplated by the relevant section of the Collective Agreement

25. September 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Human Rights Commission – Human Rights – Discrimination – Disability – Age – Labour law – Collective agreements – Workers compensation – Benefits – Judicial review – Standard of review – Reasonableness simpliciter Calgary (City) v. Alberta (Human Rights and Citizenship Commission), [2007] A.J. No. 852, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, ...

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.

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”)

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 ...

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. ...

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

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 ...

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 ...