Public Decisions

To help refine your searches, follow these rules to get more accurate results.

  • Limit the Dates - Set a date range to limit the number of results to be within that range.
  • If a term must be in all results, prepend +. (e.g. +required)
  • If a term must not be in any results, prepend -. (e.g. -banned)
  • If matches can start with a term or partial word, append *. (e.g. partial*)
  • Search for an exact word match of words or phases, enclose them in ". (e.g. "exact phrase")
  • Limit the Decision Type - Restricts the search to only the Decisions of that type.
  • Decision # 97/20

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 96/20

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 95/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's permanent partial impairment rating of 1% has been correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 94/20

    Issue: Whether or not there is entitlement to benefits in relation to the worker's death.

  • Decision # 93/20

    Issue: Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker’s right shoulder difficulties as being a consequence of the December 29, 2017 accident.

  • Decision # 92/20

    Issue: Whether or not in addition to alteration costs, the worker is entitled to a footwear allowance.

  • Decision # 91/20

    Issue: Whether or not responsibility for costs associated with a service/therapy dog should be accepted.

  • Decision # 90/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to a lumbar belt.

  • Decision # 89/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after February 12, 2019.

  • Decision # 88/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss and medical aid benefits after January 29, 2016.

  • Decision # 87/20

    Issue: 1. Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after August 15, 2017; 2. Whether or not the worker is entitled to further medical aid benefits beyond the pre-approved kinesiology sessions; 3. Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for moving costs; and 4. Whether or not the worker's psychological difficulties should be accepted as being a consequence of the February 10, 2016 accident.

  • Decision # 86/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after April 22, 2019.

  • Decision # 85/20

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 84/20

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 83/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after October 23, 2019.

  • Decision # 82/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to replacement hearing aids.

  • Decision # 81/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after August 8, 2019; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to additional medical aid benefits.

  • Decision # 80/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further benefits after July 18, 2019.

  • Decision # 79/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits for the period January 30, 2019 to June 30, 2019.

  • Decision # 78/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after September 24, 2018.

  • Decision # 77/20

    Issue: Employer Appeal:Whether or not the claim is acceptable.Worker Appeal:Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after November 6, 2018.

  • Decision # 76/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to coverage for hearing aids.

  • Decision # 75/20

    Issue: Whether or not the vocational rehabilitation plan for National Occupational Classification (NOC) 6541, Security Guards and Related Security Service Occupations is appropriate.

  • Decision # 74/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further benefits in relation to the July 18, 2019 accident.

  • Decision # 73/20

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further wage loss and medical aid benefits after October 29, 2018.