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 # 110/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits.
-
Decision # 109/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits and services beyond October 28, 2009.
-
Decision # 108/12
Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.
-
Decision # 107/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits.
-
Decision # 106/12
Issue: Whether or not the employer is entitled to cost relief.
-
Decision # 105/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is responsible for repayment of the $5616.65 overpayment.
-
Decision # 104/12
Issue: i. Whether or not the worker's PPI rating has been correctly calculated; and,ii. Whether or not the worker's lump sum impairment award has been correctly calculated.
-
Decision # 103/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further benefits; andWhether or not the worker's average earnings should be $365.71 weekly.
-
Decision # 102/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss and medical aid benefits beyond November 6, 2011.
-
Decision # 101/12
Issue: Whether or not it was appropriate to implement a post-accident deemed earning capacity of $400 per week effective October 2, 2011.
-
Decision # 100/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to benefits beyond December 2, 2010.
-
Decision # 99/12
Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.
-
Decision # 98/12
Issue: Whether or not the employer is entitled to cost relief.
-
Decision # 97/12
Issue: 2009 Claim Whether or not the worker's foot, back and neck symptoms beyond March 14, 2010 are related to the compensable injury of June 2, 2009; and Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond January 29, 2010. All Claims Whether or not the worker's post-January 30, 2010 complaints and resultant loss of earning capacity is related to his general work duties separately or together with any or any combination of his prior compensable claims.
-
Decision # 96/12
Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits for January 5 and 6, 2012.
-
Decision # 95/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond February 5, 2002.
-
Decision # 94/12
Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.
-
Decision # 93/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker's retroactive wage loss benefits have been correctly calculated;Whether or not it is appropriate to implement a deemed post-accident earning capacity of $400.00 per week effective March 11, 2012; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to further vocational rehabilitation services including retraining.
-
Decision # 92/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker's average earnings have been correctly calculated.
-
Decision # 91/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to further benefits after March 2, 2012.
-
Decision # 90/12
Issue: Whether or not it is appropriate to implement a post-accident deemed earning capacity of $380.00 per week effective May 21, 2011.
-
Decision # 89/12
Issue: Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker’s left knee complaints as having a relationship to the right knee injury of June 23, 2006; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond October 10, 2008.
-
Decision # 88/12
Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.
-
Decision # 87/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker's wage loss entitlement effective November 14, 2011 was properly calculated.
-
Decision # 86/12
Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to a permanent partial impairment award.