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 # 135/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to an independent living allowance beyond the six month timeframe.

  • Decision # 134/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's wage loss benefits should be suspended from September 21, 2004 to October 24, 2004.

  • Decision # 133/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is capable of full-time work; andWhether or not the worker's deemed post accident earning capacity should be $269.88 per week as of July 29, 2002; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to temporary total disability benefits beyond July 13, 2010.

  • Decision # 132/11

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 131/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss or medical aid benefits beyond August 8, 2010.

  • Decision # 130/11

    Issue: Whether or not further physiotherapy treatment should be authorized.

  • Decision # 129/11

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 128/11

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable; andWhether or not the employer is entitled to more than 50% cost relief.

  • Decision # 127/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond May 22, 2008.

  • Decision # 126/11

    Issue: Worker Appeal: Whether or not the worker is entitled to additional medical aid benefits or services beyond October 8, 2010; andEmployer's Appeal: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits for the period August 2 to August 6, 2010.

  • Decision # 125/11

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 124/11

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

  • Decision # 123/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is responsible for the overpayment in the amount of $66.34.

  • Decision # 122/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss or medical aid benefits beyond November 8, 2010.

  • Decision # 121/11

    Issue: Whether or not the firm's payroll allocation has been correctly determined.

  • Decision # 120/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to chiropractic treatment beyond June 30, 2010; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond June 4, 2010.

  • Decision # 119/11

    Issue: Whether or not responsibility should be accepted for the worker's right knee problems for which he first sought medical attention on July 2, 2009.

  • Decision # 118/11

    Issue: Whether or not psychological difficulties resulting from matters related to the administration of the claim are compensable; andWhether or not the worker's gross average earnings have been correctly calculated.

  • Decision # 117/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits after January 1, 2010.

  • Decision # 116/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's panic attacks and depression are related to his compensable injury.

  • Decision # 115/11

    Issue: Whether or not the claim is acceptable.

  • Decision # 114/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's claim for low back difficulties is acceptable.

  • Decision # 113/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's permanent partial impairment has been correctly assessed at 2.7%.

  • Decision # 112/11

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

  • Decision # 111/11

    Issue: Whether or not the worker's back difficulties on May 22, 2009 are related to the compensable injury of September 5, 2008; andWhether or not the worker is entitled to wage loss benefits beginning May 22, 2009.