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 # 134/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's snow removal allowance should have been discontinued in October 2009; Whether or not the worker is entitled to a retroactive independent living allowance to February 28, 2014 for seasonal yard work; and Whether or not the worker is entitled to a retroactive independent living allowance to February 28, 2014 for house maintenance and repairs.

  • Decision # 133/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after June2, 2014.

  • Decision # 132/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's initial benefit rate for thefirst 12 weeks has been correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 131/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 130/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's permanent partial disability hasbeen correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 129/15

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

  • Decision # 128/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's gradual return to work planstarting June 2, 2014 is appropriate.

  • Decision # 127/15

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

  • Decision # 126/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 125/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's permanent partial impairment hasbeen correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 124/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 123/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 122/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits after June1, 2014.

  • Decision # 121/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 120/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's ongoing back difficulties arerelated to the March 21, 2006 workplace accident.

  • Decision # 119/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker should be covered for Opioid based medications after December 28, 2014; Whether or not the worker's vocational rehabilitation plan for NOC 2231 Civil Engineering Technologist should be pursued; and Whether or not the worker's adjustment disorder and treatment is compensable.

  • Decision # 118/15

    Issue: Whether the worker is entitled to benefits beyond November 2, 2013.

  • Decision # 117/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits beyondSeptember 16, 2009.

  • Decision # 116/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 115/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 114/15

    Issue: Whether or not the vocationalrehabilitation plan for National Occupational Classification 6683, OtherElemental Services Occupations, is appropriate.

  • Decision # 113/15

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 112/15

    Issue: Date of Accident - November 5, 2013 Whether or not the worker's current left wrist symptoms are related to the November 5, 2013 compensable accident; and Date of Accident - July 12, 2014 Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 111/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefitsafter October 31, 2014.

  • Decision # 110/15

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits afterFebruary 5, 2015.