Digest: Pruden v Olysky Ltd. Partnership, 2018 SKCA 75

DateSeptember 18, 2019

Reported as: 2018 SKCA 75

Docket Number: CA18074 , CACV 3288

Court: Court of Appeal

Date: 2019-09-18

Judges:

  • Whitmore

Subjects:

  • Civil Procedure � Appeal
  • Employment Law � Labour Relations � Adjudicator � Labour Relations Board
  • Statutes � Interpretation � Limitations Act, s. 3(1)
  • Statutes � Interpretation � Saskatchewan Employment Act � s. 3-53

Digest: The applicant applied for leave to appeal a decision of the Labour Relations Board (Board) pursuant to s. 4-9 of The Saskatchewan Employment Act (Act). The applicant began work with the respondent (Employer) in 2012. In 2017, the applicant advised the Employer that he had difficulty with the work he was assigned. Later that day, he got a note from a doctor excusing him from work for four days because he was having trouble breathing. At the end of the four days, the applicant told the Employer that he thought his breathing issues were from dust and mold in the workplace. The Employer advised the applicant to let him know if he would be coming to work. The applicant did not attend work for the following three days, after which his employment was terminated for abandoning his job. In April 2017, an occupation health officer found that the Employer had not committed a discriminatory act pursuant to the Health and Safety Division of the Ministry of Labour. The applicant appealed the decision, but not within the required 15 days of service of the decision (s. 3-53 of the Act). The adjudicator of the appeal concluded that she did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because there was no provision to allow the adjudicator to extent the time to file the appeal. The applicant appealed the adjudicator�s decision to the Board and the Board concluded that the adjudicator�s decision was reasonable and correct. The Board agreed with the respondent that The Limitations Act did not apply to administrative proceedings taking place outside of court, so the applicant could not be relieved of the requirement to comply with the limitation period in the Act. The grounds of appeal were: 1) whether the Board erred in finding the adjudicator�s decision was reasonable regarding her interpretation of the Act; and 2) whether the Board erred in finding The Limitations Act did not apply to the limitation period in the Act.
HELD: The application was denied. The grounds of appeal were both questions of law so the first branch of the test for leave to appeal was met. The grounds were reviewed
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT