Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario
Latest documents
- Decision Nº 542/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 542/24 20-Sep-2024 J.Frenschkowski Psychotraumatic disability Permanent impairment {NEL} No Summary Available 11 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1464
- Decision Nº 814/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 814/24 20-Sep-2024 E.Kosmidis - M.Falcone - B.Grisdale Tear (rotator cuff) No Summary Available 7 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Document No. 15-02-02 MEDICAL DISCUSSION PAPERS CONSIDERED: Shoulder Injury and Disability Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1471
- Decision Nº 722/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 722/24 20-Sep-2024 E.Kosmidis In the course of employment (employer's premises) (construction site) In the course of employment (proceeding to and from work) (car pool) Right to sue This right to sue application brought by the applicants (defendants) concerned an action brought by the respondent (plaintiff), who alleged he was injured in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on October 26, 2020, due to the negligence of the defendants. The worker was injured in the accident while driving to a carpool location on his way to a construction site. The issue in this case turned on whether the plaintiff was a worker in the course of his employment when he was injured on October 26, 2020. The Vice-Chair denied the application. The respondent's right of action was not taken away by the WSIA. It usually took the worker around 45 minutes to get to the carpool parking lot. The plaintiff testified that he had to be at the carpool parking lot no later than 6:20 or 6:30 a.m. to secure his ride to the job site. Carpooling was the worker's choice. He used the carpool every day to get to the job site. His employer was not involved in his decision to carpool, and his employer had no role or involvement with the carpool. The carpool was arranged between the workers on the job site. The carpool van was provided by a construction company. The van would hold five to six people and its occupants frequently differed. The van would take him to the job site, which he had been working at for about one year. The accident occurred while on his way to the carpool location. OPM Document No. 15-03-05, "Travelling" states in part: "As a general rule, a worker is considered to be in the course of the employment when the person reaches the employer's premises or place of work, such as a construction work site, and is not in the course of employment when the person leaves the premises or place of work." In reading the relevant policies together, the Vice-Chair found that an employer's premises includes a place of work where a worker is entitled to be and includes a construction worksite (OPM Document No. 15-03-03). The place of work does not have to be controlled or owned by the worker's employer if the worker is entitled to be at that location. Furthermore, an employer may have more than one place of work depending on the circumstances. The Vice-Chair found that the plaintiff was commuting to his place of work, which was the construction worksite, when he was injured on October 26, 2020. A worker is normally not considered to be in the course of employment when travelling to or from their place of work. The plaintiff was also not travelling on his employer's business at the time as set out in OPM Document No. 15-03-05. Decision No. 83/19 endorses the principle that construction workers travelling to a fixed worksite are not in the course of employment and are commuting to a work site like any other worker who commutes to and from a regular place of work. The Vice-Chair agreed that Decision No. 83/19 distinguishes construction workers travelling to a construction worksite from the determination that they are travelling on the employer's business. The plaintiff was not in the course of his employment when the motor vehicle accident occurred, and, as such, his right of action against the applicants was not taken away by the WSIA. 10 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624s] BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Documents No. 15-03-03; 15-03-04; 15-03-05 TRIBUNAL DECISIONS CONSIDERED: Decision No. 83/19, 2019 ONWSIAT 1156 distd; Decision No. 876/20, 2021 ONWSIAT 35 refd to Style of Cause: Pais v. Brouwer and Ryeland Corporation et al. Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1472
- Decision Nº 1040/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 1040/24 20-Sep-2024 S.Peckover Permanent impairment {NEL} Strains and sprains (cervical) Strains and sprains (lumbar) No Summary Available 10 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1465
- Decision Nº 763/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 763/24 20-Sep-2024 R.Horne - G.Burkett - M.Ferrari Available employment (offer from accident employer) Suitable employment (suitable for worker's capabilities) Loss of earnings {LOE} (termination of employment) No Summary Available 12 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] TRIBUNAL DECISIONS CONSIDERED: Decision No. 870/23, 2023 ONWSIAT 1590 refd to Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1459
- Decision Nº 1108/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 1108/24 20-Sep-2024 C.Zehr (PT) - G.Burkett - B.Grisdale Availability for employment (refusing suitable work) (personal reasons) Permanent impairment {NEL} Recurrences (compensable injury) Strains and sprains (lumbar) Suitable employment (suitable for worker's capabilities) Loss of earnings {LOE} (eligibility) (impairment) No Summary Available 19 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Documents No. 15-02-05; 19-02-01 Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1466
- Decision Nº 83/23 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 83/23 20-Sep-2024 B.Morrow - S.Chahal - S.Roth Permanent impairment {NEL} Strains and sprains (lumbar) No Summary Available 8 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1448
- Decision Nº 1616/22 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-09-2024
Decision No. 1616/22 20-Sep-2024 N.Perryman - M.Falcone (PT) - K.Hoskin Cancer (prostate) Exposure (radiation) Exposure (ultraviolet light) Consequences of injury (secondary condition) Cancer (melanoma) The worker was a Technical Director and Installation Marketing Estimator for the employer from 1981 to 2008. The worker appealed two ARO decisions giving rise to the following issues: a) initial entitlement for melanoma of the left groin; and, b) initial entitlement for prostate cancer. The Panel allowed the appeal, in part. The Panel found, on a balance of probabilities, that the worker was entitled to benefits for melanoma. The worker's sun exposure in relation to his job duties, particularly while working overseas, was a significant contributing factor to the development of melanoma. The Panel acknowledged that the International Agency for Research on Cancer has identified solar radiation as a Class 1 carcinogen and accepted that "skin cancers are primarily caused by exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR)". The Panel also accepted that "high doses and intermittent intense sun exposure is a significant risk factor for the development of malignant melanoma". The Panel denied entitlement for prostate cancer as a secondary condition arising from the worker's occupational melanoma and radiation treatment in accordance with OPM Document No. 15-05-01. The worker had localized high-risk prostate cancer. The worker's age at the time of diagnosis and family history of cancer represented significant risk factors to the development of prostate cancer. The Panel accepted that men with high-grade localized prostate cancer, like the worker's, are "significantly more likely to have germline (inherited) DNA mutations associated with prostate cancer" as acknowledged by Dr. Welk and supported by the medical literature on file. Overall, there was insufficient credible and reliable evidence to support a causal link between the worker's prior radiation treatment and/or occupational exposures to the development of prostate cancer. 12 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624s] BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Document No. 15-05-01 CROSS-REFERENCE: Decision No. 1616/22I, 2023 ONWSIAT 177 PRACTICE DIRECTIONS CONSIDERED: Expert Evidence TRIBUNAL DECISIONS CONSIDERED: Decision No. 1696/13, 2015 ONWSIAT 14 apld; Decision No. 1229/19, 2019 ONWSIAT 2745 (CanLII) refd to Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1469
- Decision Nº 1103/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 19-09-2024
Decision No. 1103/24 19-Sep-2024 C.D'Angelo Loss of earnings {LOE} (wage loss) No Summary Available 7 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] CROSS-REFERENCE: Decision No. 381/22, 2022 ONWSIAT 589 Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1455
- Decision Nº 1131/24 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 19-09-2024
Decision No. 1131/24 19-Sep-2024 R.Gananathan Tear (rotator cuff) Tear (shoulder) (tendon) Tendinopathy (shoulder) No Summary Available 9 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4624n] Style of Cause: Neutral Citation: 2024 ONWSIAT 1458
Featured documents
- Decision Nº 1736/21 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 1736/21 15-Sep-2023 R.McCutcheon - D.Thomson - M.Tzaferis Availability for employment (relocation) Board policies (applicability of Board policy) Loss of earnings {LOE} (duration) Procedure (leading case strategy) Statutory interpretation (principles of) (large and liberal...
- Decision Nº 1169/20 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 1169/20 15-Sep-2023 R.McCutcheon - D.Thomson - M.Tzaferis Availability for employment (relocation) Board policies (applicability of Board policy) Loss of earnings {LOE} (duration) Procedure (leading case strategy) Statutory interpretation (principles of) (large and liberal...
- Decision Nº 1155/23 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 1155/23 15-Sep-2023 R.Hoare Aggravation (preexisting condition) (disc, degeneration) (cervical) Suitable employment (suitable for worker's capabilities) Loss of earnings {LOE} (eligibility) (impairment) Suitable employment (modified duties) No Summary Available 14 Pages References: Act ...
- Decision Nº 821/23 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 821/23 15-Sep-2023 V.Patel Preexisting condition (shoulder condition) Second Injury and Enhancement Fund {SIEF} (severity of accident) Second Injury and Enhancement Fund {SIEF} (severity of preexisting condition) No Summary Available 9 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case...
- Decision Nº 1066/23 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 1066/23 15-Sep-2023 R.Andal Non-economic loss {NEL} Permanent impairment {NEL} Loss of earnings {LOE} (retirement) (early) Strains and sprains (hip) On February 11, 2019, the worker slipped and fell on ice while in the course of his employment as a veterinarian. The issues under appeal ...
- Decision Nº 583/23 from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 15-09-2023
Decision No. 583/23 15-Sep-2023 A.Kosny Delay (treatment) Evidence (inconsistencies) Strains and sprains (lumbar) Concussion No Summary Available 10 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w4523n] CASES CONSIDERED: Faryna v. Chorny, 1951 CanLII 252 (BC CA) refd to Style of Cause:...
- Decision Nº Released_Decisions from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 02-11-2011
of the expert evidence provided an overview of the Supreme Court approaches to section 15(1) decisions the relevance of comparator groups submissions from the parties and from Tribunal Counsel Office the relevance of the recent Supreme Court decision in Withler analysis by the Majority on the...
- Decision Nº 687/23 I from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 29-06-2023
Decision No. 687/23I 29-Jun-2023 M.Keil Procedure (medical examination) (Tribunal assessor) (questions to assessor) No Summary Available 20 Pages References: Act Citation WSIA Other Case Reference [w3323n] BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Documents No. 16-02-03; 16-02-11...
- Decision Nº ReleasedDecisionsWithSummaryAdded from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 20-07-2023
Decision No. 485/20 20-Jul-2023 M.Keil - M.Christie - K.Hoskin Cancer (lung) Evidence (epidemiological) Exposure (asbestos) Exposure (silica dust) Procedure (leading case strategy) The worker started working for the accident employer, a fibreglass manufacturing company in 1949, working until the...
- Decision Nº ReleasedDecisionsWithSummaryAdded from Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal of Ontario, 25-07-2022
Decision No. 556/22 25-Jul-2022 R.Horne - P.Greenside - C.Salama Chronic pain Malingering Initial entitlement (eligibility) Loss of earnings {LOE} (eligibility) (impairment) The issues under appeal were the worker's entitlement for Chronic Pain Disability (CPD), and in the alternative, entitlement...