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 # 24/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker was overpaid benefits in the amount of $3,086.68 for 2016 and $703.44 for 2017; andWhether or not the overpayments must be repaid.

  • Decision # 23/18

    Issue: Whether or not a Medical Review Panel should be convened under subsection 67(4) of the Act.

  • Decision # 22/18

    Issue: Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the L4-L5 disc protrusion as being a consequence of the compensable accident; andWhether or not the established post-accident earnings capacity remains accurate.

  • Decision # 21/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 20/18

    Issue: Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker's right shoulder difficulties as being a consequence of the July 21, 2015 accident; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after January 5, 2017.

  • Decision # 19/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits for March 3, 2017.

  • Decision # 18/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after April 26, 2017.

  • Decision # 17/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 16/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker was entitled to further benefits.

  • Decision # 15/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 14/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after October 20, 2016.

  • Decision # 13/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further wage loss or medical aid benefits.

  • Decision # 12/18

    Issue: Whether or not the appellant firm should be charged 50% of the claim costs in relation to an injury sustained by a worker employed by another firm.

  • Decision # 11/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 10/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to additional physiotherapy treatment.

  • Decision # 09/18

    Issue: Whether or not the right of action filed by a worker against his employer and two co-workers of the employer is barred pursuant to the provisions of the Act.

  • Decision # 08/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after March 19, 2015.

  • Decision # 07/18

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

  • Decision # 06/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's chipped tooth should be accepted as being a consequence of the compensable injury.Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after November 2, 2016.

  • Decision # 05/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after February 15, 2016.

  • Decision # 04/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 03/18

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to a hearing aid for his right ear.

  • Decision # 02/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 01/18

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 01/18

    Issue: Whether or not financial responsibility should be accepted for medical cannabis.