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 # 14/08

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 13/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker’s left knee problems are related to the January 20, 2005 compensable injury.

  • Decision # 12/08

    Issue: Whether or not the employer should be assessed a late reporting penalty of $225.00.

  • Decision # 11/08

    Issue: Whether or not the effective date of August 17, 2005 for the 2% permanent partial disability award for left knee instability is correct.

  • Decision # 10/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits beyond July 21, 2006.

  • Decision # 09/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond November 18, 2006.

  • Decision # 08/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker’s wage loss benefits have been correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 08/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to an increase in the cosmetic impairment rating.

  • Decision # 07/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits beyond July 6, 2007.

  • Decision # 06/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker’s entitlement to full wage loss benefits should be reinstated; andWhether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker’s radial tunnel condition.

  • Decision # 05/08

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 04/08

    Issue: Whether or not the worker’s back complaints are related to the September 1974 compensable injury; andWhether or not it was appropriate to implement the worker’s deemed post accident earning capacity of minimum wage for a 40 hour week effective September 25, 2003.

  • Decision # 03/08

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 02/08

    Issue: Whether or not the employer is entitled to cost relief.

  • Decision # 02/08

    Issue: Whether or not the time for making an application for compensation should be extended.

  • Decision # 01/08

    Issue: Employer’s Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after January 3, 2003.Worker’s Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to a period of job search and associated benefits beyond February 20, 2007.

  • Decision # 01/08

    Issue: Whether or not the claimant is entitled to an increase in the $.26 per kilometer rate currently being paid to him.

  • Decision # 172/07

    Issue: Issue #1:Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits. Issue #2:Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker’s right carpal tunnel syndrome and right epicondylitis.

  • Decision # 171/07

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits beyond October 12, 2006.

  • Decision # 170/07

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits for the period September 27, 2005 to December 8, 2005 inclusive.

  • Decision # 169/07

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 168/07

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after November 17, 2006.

  • Decision # 167/07

    Issue: Whether or not a Medical Review Panel should be convened pursuant to subsection 67(4) of the Act; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond February 19, 2007.

  • Decision # 166/07

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond May 9, 2003.

  • Decision # 165/07

    Issue: Whether or not the worker should be provided with a whirlpool tub.