Osmond v. Workers' Compensation Commission (Nfld.), (2001) 200 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 202 (NFCA)

• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Court: Court of Appeal (Newfoundland)
• Judge: Wells, C.J.N., Marshall and Green, JJ.A.
• Citation: (2001), 200 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 202 (NFCA)
• Date: 13 January 2001

Osmond v. WCC (2001), 200 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 202 (NFCA);

    603 A.P.R. 202

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2001] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. AP.045

Edwina Osmond (appellant) v. Workers' Compensation Commission (respondent)

(98/116; 2001 NFCA 21)

Indexed As: Osmond v. Workers' Compensation Commission (Nfld.)

Newfoundland Supreme Court

Court of Appeal

Wells, C.J.N., Marshall and Green, JJ.A.

April 26, 2001.

Summary:

Osmond received workers' compensation benefits after suffering a work related injury. Her benefits were discontinued and her claim was forwarded to the extended earnings loss claims department for assessment. Osmond was denied extended earnings loss benefits on the ground that she had refused to under­take the recommended rehabilitation. Os­mond appealed to the appeal tribunal. The tribunal denied the appeal. Osmond appealed.

The Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division, in a decision unreported in this series of reports, dismissed the appeal. Os­mond appealed.

The Newfoundland Court of Appeal, Wells, C.J.N., dissenting, allowed the appeal.

Editor's Note: For a related case, see 149 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 40; 467 A.P.R. 40.

Workers' Compensation - Topic 1067

Boards - Jurisdiction - To require partici­pation in rehabilitation program - A worker received benefits after a work related injury - For five years, she suffered chronic back pain - Medical opinions, initially optimistic about her recovery, subsequently assessed her as being unable to retrain because of her debilitating pain -The Workers' Compensation Commission denied her extended earnings loss benefits after she refused to undertake a rehabilita­tion program - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal held that the Commission was not entitled to automatically refuse com­pensation for failure to participate in a rehabilitation program - The Commission must make a determination that she was capable of undertaking the rehabilitation and acted unreasonably in refusing it - See paragraphs 103 to 119.

Workers' Compensation - Topic 5505

Compensation - Bars - Failure to partici­pate in rehabilitation or retraining program - [See Workers' Compensation - Topic 1067 ].

Workers' Compensation - Topic 7006

Practice - Appeals - Review of board's decision by an appeal board or by the courts - Standard of review - The New­foundland Court of Appeal discussed the standard of review of decisions respecting workers' compensation - See paragraphs 51 to 99.

Workers' Compensation - Topic 7082.1

Practice - Appeals to the courts - Question of fact - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal stated that "it is not sufficient, therefore, to reason that, because a matter is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission and is a question of fact, it is automatically immune from appellate review on the grounds of law or jurisdic­tion. If the factual determination arrived at is patently unreasonable because there is no evidence to support it, it will neverthe­less be subject to appellant scrutiny since it will involve a question as to the Com­mission's jurisdiction and its affirmation by the WCAT [Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal] would amount to legal error on its part" - See paragraph 161.

Workers' Compensation - Topic 7083

Practice - Appeals to the courts - Excess or loss of jurisdiction - A worker received benefits after a work related injury - For five years, she suffered chronic back pain - Medical opinions, initially optimistic about her recovery, subsequently assessed her as being unable to retrain because of her debilitating pain - The Workers' Com­pensation Commission denied her extended earnings loss benefits after she refused to undertake a rehabilitation program - The Appeal Tribunal affirmed the Commis­sion's decision - The Trial Division judge upheld the decision of the Appeal Tribunal - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal held that the worker was entitled to the benefits - The Trial Division judge erred in not finding that there was no evidence rationally connected to the specific issue under consideration and this absence of evidence rendered the Commission's and the Tribunal's decisions patently unreason­able; in not finding that the Tribunal com­mitted an error of law in upholding the Commission's patently unreasonable deci­sion; and in not finding a failure to make inferences favourable to the worker - See paragraphs 103 to 171.

Workers' Compensation - Topic 7102

Practice - Evidence - Favourable inferences - The Newfoundland Court of Appeal discussed the Workers' Compensation Board's obligation to draw inferences favourable to a claimant pursuant to s. 60 of the Workers' Compensation Act - See paragraphs 120 to 138.

Cases Noticed:

Ward v. Workers' Compensation Review Division (1997), 138 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 167; 431 A.P.R. 167, appeal withdrawn 155 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 178; 481 A.P.R. 178; 151 D.L.R.(4th) 764 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 41].

United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 579 v. Bradco Construction Ltd., [1993] 2 S.C.R. 316; 153 N.R. 81; 106 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 140; 334 A.P.R. 140; 102 D.L.R.(4th) 402, refd to. [paras. 48, 94].

Workers' Compensation Commission (Nfld.) v. Breen et al. (1997), 149 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 335; 467 A.P.R. 335 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 66].

Chamberlain et al. v. Workers' Compensa­tion Commission (Nfld.) et al. (1999), 172 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 51; 528 A.P.R. 51 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 67, 178].

Nash, Re (1993), 109 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 19; 343 A.P.R. 19 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 69].

Hallingham v. Workers' Compensation Commission (Nfld.) (1997), 158 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 21; 490 A.P.R. 21 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 69, 189].

Bell Canada v. Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1722; 97 N.R. 15; 60 D.L.R.(4th) 682, refd to. [paras. 76, 198].

Pezim v. British Columbia Securities Commission et al., [1994] 2 S.C.R. 557; 168 N.R. 321; 46 B.C.A.C. 1; 75 W.A.C. 1; [1994] 7 W.W.R. 1; 92 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145; 14 B.C.R.(2d) 217; 22 Admin. L.R.(2d) 1; 114 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [paras. 76, 175].

Pezim v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Brokers) - see Pezim v. British Col­umbia Securities Commission et al.

Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act v. Southam Inc. et al., [1997] 1 S.C.R. 748; 209 N.R. 20, refd to. [paras. 78, 175].

Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citi­zenship and Immigration), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982; 226 N.R. 201; 160 D.L.R.(4th) 193, refd to. [para. 79].

Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817; 243 N.R. 22, refd to. [para. 79].

Pasiechnyk et al. v. Procrane Inc. et al., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 890; 216 N.R. 1; 158 Sask.R. 81; 153 W.A.C. 81; 149 D.L.R.(4th) 577, refd to. [paras. 80, 178].

Pasiechnyk v. Workers' Compensation Board (Sask.) - see Pasiechnyk v. Pro­crane Inc. et al.

Welsh v. Workers' Compensation Board (Nfld.) (1984), 45 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 168; 132 A.P.R. 168 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 82].

Brinton v. Workers' Compensation Board (Nfld.) (1982), 38 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 433; 108 A.P.R 433 (Nfld. C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1983), 41 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 90; 119 A.P.R. 90 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 82].

Chaffey v. Workers' Compensation Com­mission (Nfld.) (1992), 103 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 85; 326 A.P.R. 85 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [paras. 82, 221].

Rudicil v. Workers' Compensation Board (Nfld.) (1983), 44 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 42; 130 A.P.R. 42 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 82].

Lester (W.W.) (1978) Ltd. - see Planet Development Corp.

Planet Development Corp. and Lester (W.W.) (1978) Ltd. v. United Associ­ation of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry in the United States and Canada, Local 740, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 644; 123 N.R. 241; 88 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 15; 274 A.P.R. 15; 91 C.L.L.C. 14,002; 76 D.L.R.(4th) 389; 48 Admin. L.R. 1, refd to. [para. 83].

Canadian Wire Service Guild et al. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1998), 174 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 24; 533 A.P.R. 24 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 84].

DGH Construction Ltd. v. Workers' Com­pensation Commission (Nfld.) (1997), 150 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 50; 470 A.P.R. 50 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 84].

Blanchard v. Control Data Canada Ltd., [1984] 2 S.C.R. 476; 55 N.R. 194; 14 D.L.R.(4th) 289; 84 C.C.L.C. 14,070; 14 Admin. L.R. 133, refd to. [para. 84].

Gellately v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (Nfld.) (1995), 132 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 134; 410 A.P.R. 134 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 99].

Erco v. Workers' Compensation Commis­sion (Nfld.) (1989), 74 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 308; 231 A.P.R. 308 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 99].

Wheatley v. Workers' Compensation Board (P.E.I.) (1994), 124 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 66; 384 A.P.R. 66 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [para. 113].

Stretch v. Workers' Compensation Board (P.E.I.) (1991), 96 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 254; 305 A.P.R. 254 (P.E.I.C.A.), refd to. [paras. 113, 295].

Hamilton v. Workers' Compensation Com­mission (Nfld.) (1985), 55 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 326; 162 A.P.R. 326 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 113].

Rijntjes v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Tribunal (N.S.) (1998), 170 N.S.R.(2d) 309; 515 A.P.R. 309 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 125].

Hubley v. Workers' Compensation Board (N.S.) (1992), 111 N.S.R.(2d) 295; 303 A.P.R. 295 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 125, 305].

Moore v. Workers' Compensation Board (P.E.I.) (1992), 101 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 119; 321 A.P.R. 119 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 126, 305].

Brinton v. Workers' Compensation Board (Nfld.) (1982), 38 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 433; 108 A.P.R. 433 (Nfld. C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1983), 48 N.R. 160; 41 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 90; 119 A.P.R. 90 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 127].

Keough v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (Nfld.) et al. (1994), 125 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 58 ; 389 A.P.R. 58 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Sooley v. Workers' Compensation Review Division (Nfld.) (1997), 157 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 171; 486 A.P.R. 171 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Miller v. Workers' Compensation Commis­sion (Nfld.) et al. (1997), 154 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 52; 479 A.P.R. 52 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Morgan v. Workers' Compensation Review Division (Nfld.) et al. (1999), 175 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 43; 537 A.P.R. 43 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [par.a 129].

Miller v. Workers' Compensation Commis­sion (Nfld.) (1998), 167 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 115; 513 A.P.R. 115 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Clancey v. Workers' Compensation Com­mission (Nfld.) et al. (2000), 187 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 1; 566 A.P.R. 1 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Wheaton v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (Nfld.) et al., [2000] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. Uned. 91 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Jacobs v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (Nfld.) et al., [2001] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. Uned. 10 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 129].

Canadian Pacific Railway v. Murray, [1932] S.C.R. 112, refd to. [para. 134].

R. v. Hillier (L.) et al. (1993), 109 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 92; 343 A.P.R. 92 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 134].

Jones v. Great Western Railway (1930), 47 T.L.R. 39 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 135].

Cabot Institute of Applied Arts and Tech­nology v. Tripp et al. (1989), 75 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 231; 234 A.P.R. 231 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 157].

Board of Education of Toronto v. Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation District 15 et al., [1997] 1 S.C.R. 487; 208 N.R. 245; 98 O.A.C. 241, 144 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 175].

Reference Re Sections 32 and 34 of the Workers' Compensation Act (Nfld.) (1987), 67 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 16; 206 A.P.R. 16; 44 D.L.R.(4th) 501 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 178].

Salvation Army Grace General Hospital v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (Nfld.) et al. (1995), 131 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 214 ; 408 A.P.R. 214 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 207].

Lundrigans Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re (1996), 146 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 252; 456 A.P.R. 252 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 212].

Massicotte v. Boutin, [1969] S.C.R. 818, refd to. [para. 213].

York (Township) v. North York (Town­ship) (1925), 57 O.L.R. 644 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 213].

Fahey Building Ltd. v. United Steelworkers of America, Local 6204 (1981), 33 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 135; 93 A.P.R. 135 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 219].

Farrell et al. v. Workmen's Compensation Board (B.C.), [1962] S.C.R. 48, refd to. [para. 219].

Canadian Lift Truck v. Minister of Nation­al Revenue (1955), 1 D.L.R.(2d) 497 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 276].

Statutes Noticed:

Judicature Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. J-4, sect. 34 [paras. 74, 206].

Workers' Compensation Act, R.S.N. 1990, c. W-11, sect. 5(1) [para. 187]; sect. 19 [para. 186]; sect. 19(2) [para. 57]; sect. 25 [para. 189]; sect. 25(2) [para. 71]; sect. 25(4) [para. 224]; sect. 34 [paras. 60, 190]; sect. 36(1) [para. 207]; sect. 60 [paras. 122, 304]; sect. 62 [para. 293]; sect. 74(1) [para. 103]; sect. 74(2.1) [para. 272]; sect. 74(3) [paras. 104, 272].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Côté, Pierre-André, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada (3rd Ed. 2000), p. 360 [para. 214].

Driedger, Elmer A., The Construction of Statutes (3rd Ed.), p. 186 [para. 214

Ison, Workers' Compensation in Canada (2nd Ed.), para. 9.7.1 [para. 120].

Jones and De Villars, Principles of Admin­istrative Law (3rd Ed.), pp. 472 [para. 90]; 481 [para. 98]; 539, 540 [para. 223].

Counsel:

Gregory Kirby, for the appellant;

Donna Strong, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on January 13, 2001, before Wells., C.J.N., Marshall and Green, JJ.A., of the Newfoundland Court of Appeal. On April 26, 2001, the decision of the court was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

Green, J.A., Marshall, J.A., concurring - see paragraphs 1 to 171;

Wells, C.J.N., dissenting - see paragraphs 172 to 308.