Appeals in Worker's Compensation Claims (7:XIII) - Revision history

Nate Russell at 22:21, 27 November 2025

2025-11-27T22:21:35Z

LSLAP at 19:06, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:06:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:06, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~September 2, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 18 July 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = workers}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = workers}}

LSLAP: /* C. Judicial Review (JR) */

2025-09-28T07:57:55Z

C. Judicial Review (JR)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:57, 28 September 2025
Line 95:		Line 95:
	== C. Judicial Review (JR) ==		== C. Judicial Review (JR) ==

	A party may apply for judicial review at the same time that they apply for a reconsideration of a decision from WCAT. A party must apply for judicial review of a WCAT decision by the British Columbia Supreme Court '''within 60 days''' of the date on which a decision is issued. Under certain circumstances, the court may extend the time for applying. Due to clear language in the ''Administrative Tribunal Act'', Judicial Review of WCAT decisions are held to the standard of patent unreasonableness on most questions (constitutional issues and questions of so-called true jurisdiction are exceptions). This is the highest level of judicial deference and limits the court's ability to interfere unless the decision was “openly, evidently, clearly wrong” ([https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1997/1997canlii385/1997canlii385.html?autocompleteStr=Canada%2520(Director%2520of%2520Investigation%2520and%2520Research)%2520v%2520Southam%2520Inc.%252C%2520%255B1997%255D%25201%2520S.C.R.%2520748&autocompletePos=1 ''Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) v Southam Inc.'', [1997<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 748]; [https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 ''Fraser Health''], supra).		A party may apply for judicial review at the same time that they apply for a reconsideration of a decision from WCAT. A party must apply for judicial review of a WCAT decision by the British Columbia Supreme Court '''within 60 days''' of the date on which a decision is issued. Under certain circumstances, the court may extend the time for applying. Due to clear language in the ''Administrative Tribunal Act'', Judicial Review of WCAT decisions are held to the standard of patent unreasonableness on most questions (constitutional issues and questions of so-called true jurisdiction are exceptions). This is the highest level of judicial deference and limits the court's ability to interfere unless the decision was “openly, evidently, clearly wrong” (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1997/1997canlii385/1997canlii385.html?autocompleteStr=Canada%2520(Director%2520of%2520Investigation%2520and%2520Research)%2520v%2520Southam%2520Inc.%252C%2520%255B1997%255D%25201%2520S.C.R.%2520748&autocompletePos=1 Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) v Southam Inc.]'', [1997<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 748; ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 Fraser Health]'', supra).

	'''Possible judicial review cases should be referred to lawyers, as it is very difficult to file and conduct a judicial review case without a lawyer’s assistance.''' See [[Introduction to Public Complaints (5:I)\|'''Chapter 5: Public Complaints Procedures''']] for more information about judicial review.		'''Possible judicial review cases should be referred to lawyers, as it is very difficult to file and conduct a judicial review case without a lawyer’s assistance.''' See [[Introduction to Public Complaints (5:I)\|'''Chapter 5: Public Complaints Procedures''']] for more information about judicial review.
Line 101:		Line 101:
	Note that if Judicial Review and reconsideration are both possible, it is advisable for the worker to file their paperwork for Judicial Review within the 60-day time limit and then apply for reconsideration. This ensures that they will still be able to pursue Judicial Review if their reconsideration is denied.		Note that if Judicial Review and reconsideration are both possible, it is advisable for the worker to file their paperwork for Judicial Review within the 60-day time limit and then apply for reconsideration. This ensures that they will still be able to pursue Judicial Review if their reconsideration is denied.

	According to [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2017/2017bcca403/2017bcca403.html?autocompleteStr=Denton%2520v%2520British%2520Columbia%2520(Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal)%252C%25202017%2520BCCA%252040&autocompletePos=1 ''Denton v British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)'', 2017 BCCA 40], where an appeal raises constitutional issues, those issues must be raised prior to the JR stage at the British Columbia Supreme Court. Both the Review Division and WCAT have the authority to hear constitutional issues.		According to ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2017/2017bcca403/2017bcca403.html?autocompleteStr=Denton%2520v%2520British%2520Columbia%2520(Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal)%252C%25202017%2520BCCA%252040&autocompletePos=1 Denton v British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)]'', 2017 BCCA 40, where an appeal raises constitutional issues, those issues must be raised prior to the JR stage at the British Columbia Supreme Court. Both the Review Division and WCAT have the authority to hear constitutional issues.

	== D. Access to Files ==		== D. Access to Files ==

LSLAP: /* 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions */

2025-09-28T07:55:51Z

3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:55, 28 September 2025
Line 55:		Line 55:
	=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===		=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===

	WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 Fraser Health Authority]'', case, supra.		WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 Fraser Health Authority]'' case, supra.

	Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.		Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.

LSLAP: /* 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions */

2025-09-28T07:55:35Z

3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:55, 28 September 2025
Line 59:		Line 59:
	Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.		Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.

	:'''Note''': A “true jurisdictional error” is an argument that should be used with caution, as the SCC has ceased recognizing jurisdictional questions as a separate category of questions separate from any other type of question on judicial review. See [https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18078/index.do ''Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov'', 2019 SCC 65], at paras 65–68.		:'''Note''': A “true jurisdictional error” is an argument that should be used with caution, as the SCC has ceased recognizing jurisdictional questions as a separate category of questions separate from any other type of question on judicial review. See ''[https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18078/index.do Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov]'', 2019 SCC 65, at paras 65–68.

	On these grounds, WCAT may rehear all or part of the appeal and come to a different conclusion. However, WCAT '''cannot''' change the outcome of a WCAT decision because it is incorrect, unreasonable, or patently unreasonable. In this respect, the WCAT decision is final, reviewable only by a court on judicial review, with a time limit to apply for judicial review of '''60 days''' under the ''Administrative Tribunal Act''.		On these grounds, WCAT may rehear all or part of the appeal and come to a different conclusion. However, WCAT '''cannot''' change the outcome of a WCAT decision because it is incorrect, unreasonable, or patently unreasonable. In this respect, the WCAT decision is final, reviewable only by a court on judicial review, with a time limit to apply for judicial review of '''60 days''' under the ''Administrative Tribunal Act''.

LSLAP: /* B: Appeal to Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) */

2025-09-28T07:54:44Z

B: Appeal to Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:54, 28 September 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:
	* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].		* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].

	As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html?autocompleteStr=Preast%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202015%2520BCCA%2520377&autocompletePos=1 ''Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2015 BCCA 377] – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational ([https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html?autocompleteStr=Macrae%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520BCSC%2520133&autocompletePos=1 ''Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2016 BCSC 133]).		As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html?autocompleteStr=Preast%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202015%2520BCCA%2520377&autocompletePos=1 Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2015 BCCA 377 – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html?autocompleteStr=Macrae%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520BCSC%2520133&autocompletePos=1 Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2016 BCSC 133).

	WCAT’s ''Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure'' (MRPP) is accessible online at [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca], as are appeal forms, guidelines, and information about filing appeals.		WCAT’s ''Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure'' (MRPP) is accessible online at [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca], as are appeal forms, guidelines, and information about filing appeals.
Line 55:		Line 55:
	=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===		=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===

	WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the [https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 ''Fraser Health Authority''] case, supra.		WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 Fraser Health Authority]'', case, supra.

	Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.		Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.
Line 87:		Line 87:
	The first stage of reconsideration results in a formal written decision, issued by a WCAT panel, determining whether there are grounds for reconsideration. If the panel concludes that there are no grounds for reconsideration, WCAT will take no further action on the matter. If a panel decides that there are grounds for reconsideration, the original decision will then be found void (in whole or in part) and the application will proceed to the second stage at which a WCAT panel will hear the appeal once again. WCAT will decide whether the second stage will be conducted by oral hearing or written submission.		The first stage of reconsideration results in a formal written decision, issued by a WCAT panel, determining whether there are grounds for reconsideration. If the panel concludes that there are no grounds for reconsideration, WCAT will take no further action on the matter. If a panel decides that there are grounds for reconsideration, the original decision will then be found void (in whole or in part) and the application will proceed to the second stage at which a WCAT panel will hear the appeal once again. WCAT will decide whether the second stage will be conducted by oral hearing or written submission.

	WCAT has the authority to reconsider both WCAT and the former Appeal Division decisions. WCAT does not, however, have the authority to reconsider decisions by the former Review Board or the current Review Division. Objections to those decisions will be treated as appeals or applications for extensions of time to appeal. Additionally, WCAT cannot reconsider its own decisions for unreasonableness, patent unreasonableness, or error ([https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 ''Fraser Health''], supra).		WCAT has the authority to reconsider both WCAT and the former Appeal Division decisions. WCAT does not, however, have the authority to reconsider decisions by the former Review Board or the current Review Division. Objections to those decisions will be treated as appeals or applications for extensions of time to appeal. Additionally, WCAT cannot reconsider its own decisions for unreasonableness, patent unreasonableness, or error (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1 Fraser Health]'', supra).

	In view of the finality of these provisions, especially where a decision has not been appealed, any worker who is not completely satisfied with a decision should request a review by the Review Division and, if allowed, an appeal to WCAT. This will preserve a residual right to present new evidence in the future, even if the appeal is unsuccessful.		In view of the finality of these provisions, especially where a decision has not been appealed, any worker who is not completely satisfied with a decision should request a review by the Review Division and, if allowed, an appeal to WCAT. This will preserve a residual right to present new evidence in the future, even if the appeal is unsuccessful.

LSLAP: /* B: Appeal to Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) */

2025-09-28T07:53:07Z

B: Appeal to Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:53, 28 September 2025
Line 34:		Line 34:
	* decisions respecting vocational rehabilitation (Act, s. 155 [Former Act, s. 16]);		* decisions respecting vocational rehabilitation (Act, s. 155 [Former Act, s. 16]);
	* amount of a functional pension if the possible range is 5% or less, and commuting a pension into a lump sum payment (WCA, ss. 195, 230 and 231 [Former Act, ss. 23 and 35]);		* amount of a functional pension if the possible range is 5% or less, and commuting a pension into a lump sum payment (WCA, ss. 195, 230 and 231 [Former Act, ss. 23 and 35]);
	* decisions applying procedural time limits specified by the Board under s. 338 of the ~~Act~~ [Former Act, s. 96(8)];		* decisions applying procedural time limits specified by the Board under s. 338 of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 96(8)];
	* decisions refusing to allow an extension of time to file a request for review (Act, s. 270(2) [Former Act, s. 96.2(4)]);		* decisions refusing to allow an extension of time to file a request for review (Act, s. 270(2) [Former Act, s. 96.2(4)]);
	* decisions relating to the conduct and procedural policies implemented by the Review Division for the internal review (Act, ss. 272(2) to (5) and (8) [Former Act, s. 96.4(2) to (5) and (7)]);		* decisions relating to the conduct and procedural policies implemented by the Review Division for the internal review (Act, ss. 272(2) to (5) and (8) [Former Act, s. 96.4(2) to (5) and (7)]);
	* orders by the chief review officer as to whether or not to suspend the operation of a decision pending completion of the review (Act, s. 270(3) [Former Act, s. 96.2(5)]);		* orders by the chief review officer as to whether or not to suspend the operation of a decision pending completion of the review (Act, s. 270(3) [Former Act, s. 96.2(5)]);
	* decisions about whether or not to refer a decision back to the Board following completion of the Review Division hearing (Act, s. 272(9)(b) [Former Act, s. 96.4(8)(b)]); or		* decisions about whether or not to refer a decision back to the Board following completion of the Review Division hearing (Act, s. 272(9)(b) [Former Act, s. 96.4(8)(b)]); or
	* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ~~Act~~ [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].		* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].

	As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html?autocompleteStr=Preast%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202015%2520BCCA%2520377&autocompletePos=1 ''Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2015 BCCA 377] – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational ([https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html?autocompleteStr=Macrae%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520BCSC%2520133&autocompletePos=1 ''Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2016 BCSC 133]).		As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html?autocompleteStr=Preast%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202015%2520BCCA%2520377&autocompletePos=1 ''Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2015 BCCA 377] – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational ([https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html?autocompleteStr=Macrae%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520BCSC%2520133&autocompletePos=1 ''Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal'', 2016 BCSC 133]).

LSLAP at 07:51, 28 September 2025

2025-09-28T07:51:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:51, 28 September 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:
	If the worker (or the employer) disagrees with a Board decision, they may appeal the decision to the Review Division (“'''RD'''”) '''within 90 days''' of the Board’s decision. The RD is a review body internal to the Board. Links to RD material, including RD appeal forms, are available on the Board website ([http://www.worksafebc.com/en/review-appeal www.worksafebc.com/en/review-appeal]). The RD must issue a decision '''within 180 days''' of the appeal being filed. The RD decision may then be appealed to an independent tribunal, the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (“'''WCAT'''”) '''within 30 days''' of the RD decision. WCAT appeal forms are available on the WCAT website: [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca].		If the worker (or the employer) disagrees with a Board decision, they may appeal the decision to the Review Division (“'''RD'''”) '''within 90 days''' of the Board’s decision. The RD is a review body internal to the Board. Links to RD material, including RD appeal forms, are available on the Board website ([http://www.worksafebc.com/en/review-appeal www.worksafebc.com/en/review-appeal]). The RD must issue a decision '''within 180 days''' of the appeal being filed. The RD decision may then be appealed to an independent tribunal, the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (“'''WCAT'''”) '''within 30 days''' of the RD decision. WCAT appeal forms are available on the WCAT website: [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca].

	Section 123(1) of the ''~~Act~~'' [Former Act, s. 96(4)] does allow the Board to “reconsider” '''any''' past decision, on its own initiative, but s. 123(2) of the ''~~Act~~'' [Former Act, s. 96(5)] prohibits it from doing so if a decision is more than '''75 days old''', unless there has been fraud or misrepresentation (such as when video evidence may show that the worker is less disabled than claimed) or if there is a clear error or omission. The Board interprets this to mean that the reconsideration '''must be completed''', not just initiated, by the 75th day.		Section 123(1) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 96(4)] does allow the Board to “reconsider” '''any''' past decision, on its own initiative, but s. 123(2) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 96(5)] prohibits it from doing so if a decision is more than '''75 days old''', unless there has been fraud or misrepresentation (such as when video evidence may show that the worker is less disabled than claimed) or if there is a clear error or omission. The Board interprets this to mean that the reconsideration '''must be completed''', not just initiated, by the 75th day.

	Please note that once a request for a review has been filed, the CM is no longer allowed to proceed with a reconsideration.		Please note that once a request for a review has been filed, the CM is no longer allowed to proceed with a reconsideration.

Nate Russell: Nate Russell moved page Appeals in Worker's Compensation Claims (7:XII) to Appeals in Worker's Compensation Claims (7:XIII): 2025 LSLAP revision

2025-09-04T22:34:12Z

Nate Russell moved page Appeals in Worker's Compensation Claims (7:XII) to Appeals in Worker's Compensation Claims (7:XIII): 2025 LSLAP revision

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:34, 4 September 2025
(No difference)

LSLAP at 00:10, 3 September 2024

2024-09-03T00:10:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:10, 3 September 2024
Line 8:		Line 8:
	Please note that once a request for a review has been filed, the CM is no longer allowed to proceed with a reconsideration.		Please note that once a request for a review has been filed, the CM is no longer allowed to proceed with a reconsideration.

	== A. Internal Review: ~~Workers’~~ Compensation Review Decision ==		== A. Internal Review: Workers Compensation Review Decision ==

	A worker, a deceased worker's dependant, or an employer may request a review of any of the following decisions of the Board:		A worker, a deceased worker's dependant, or an employer may request a review of any of the following decisions of the Board:

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:21, 27 November 2025
Line 41:		Line 41:
	* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].		* decisions respecting the conduct of a review in respect of any matter that cannot be appealed to WCAT under s. 288(2)(b)–(e) of the ''WCA'' [Former Act, s. 239(2)(b)–(e)].

	As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html~~?autocompleteStr=Preast%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202015%2520BCCA%2520377&autocompletePos=1~~ Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2015 BCCA 377 – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html~~?autocompleteStr=Macrae%2520v%2520Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520BCSC%2520133&autocompletePos=1~~ Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2016 BCSC 133).		As an administrative tribunal, WCAT is subject to the expectations of procedural fairness common to all such bodies (i.e., an appellant’s right to be heard, right to a decision from an unbiased decision maker, right to a decision from the person who hears the case, and a right to reasons for the decision). As an independent body, WCAT is not bound by any WCB findings and has exclusive jurisdiction to make any findings of fact it deems relevant to the appeal (pre-revision WCA s. 254 as interpreted in ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2015/2015bcca377/2015bcca377.html Preast v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2015 BCCA 377 – this likely applies to its revised equivalent, the current s. 308). Additionally, WCAT is not bound by its own previous decisions unless departing from them is clearly irrational (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2016/2016bcsc133/2016bcsc133.html Macrae v Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal]'', 2016 BCSC 133).

	WCAT’s ''Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure'' (MRPP) is accessible online at [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca], as are appeal forms, guidelines, and information about filing appeals.		WCAT’s ''Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure'' (MRPP) is accessible online at [http://www.wcat.bc.ca www.wcat.bc.ca], as are appeal forms, guidelines, and information about filing appeals.
Line 55:		Line 55:
	=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===		=== 3. Reconsideration of WCAT Decisions ===

	WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html~~?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1~~ Fraser Health Authority]'' case, supra.		WCAT may reconsider a final decision for very limited reasons after its reconsideration powers were considered by both the BCCA and the SCC in the ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html Fraser Health Authority]'' case, supra.

	Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.		Under the WCA, a WCAT panel may change the outcome of a WCAT decision if there is new evidence. In addition, WCAT may still reconsider a WCAT decision under common law grounds if there is procedural unfairness or a true '''jurisdictional error'''.
Line 87:		Line 87:
	The first stage of reconsideration results in a formal written decision, issued by a WCAT panel, determining whether there are grounds for reconsideration. If the panel concludes that there are no grounds for reconsideration, WCAT will take no further action on the matter. If a panel decides that there are grounds for reconsideration, the original decision will then be found void (in whole or in part) and the application will proceed to the second stage at which a WCAT panel will hear the appeal once again. WCAT will decide whether the second stage will be conducted by oral hearing or written submission.		The first stage of reconsideration results in a formal written decision, issued by a WCAT panel, determining whether there are grounds for reconsideration. If the panel concludes that there are no grounds for reconsideration, WCAT will take no further action on the matter. If a panel decides that there are grounds for reconsideration, the original decision will then be found void (in whole or in part) and the application will proceed to the second stage at which a WCAT panel will hear the appeal once again. WCAT will decide whether the second stage will be conducted by oral hearing or written submission.

	WCAT has the authority to reconsider both WCAT and the former Appeal Division decisions. WCAT does not, however, have the authority to reconsider decisions by the former Review Board or the current Review Division. Objections to those decisions will be treated as appeals or applications for extensions of time to appeal. Additionally, WCAT cannot reconsider its own decisions for unreasonableness, patent unreasonableness, or error (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html~~?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1~~ Fraser Health]'', supra).		WCAT has the authority to reconsider both WCAT and the former Appeal Division decisions. WCAT does not, however, have the authority to reconsider decisions by the former Review Board or the current Review Division. Objections to those decisions will be treated as appeals or applications for extensions of time to appeal. Additionally, WCAT cannot reconsider its own decisions for unreasonableness, patent unreasonableness, or error (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html Fraser Health]'', supra).

	In view of the finality of these provisions, especially where a decision has not been appealed, any worker who is not completely satisfied with a decision should request a review by the Review Division and, if allowed, an appeal to WCAT. This will preserve a residual right to present new evidence in the future, even if the appeal is unsuccessful.		In view of the finality of these provisions, especially where a decision has not been appealed, any worker who is not completely satisfied with a decision should request a review by the Review Division and, if allowed, an appeal to WCAT. This will preserve a residual right to present new evidence in the future, even if the appeal is unsuccessful.
Line 95:		Line 95:
	== C. Judicial Review (JR) ==		== C. Judicial Review (JR) ==

	A party may apply for judicial review at the same time that they apply for a reconsideration of a decision from WCAT. A party must apply for judicial review of a WCAT decision by the British Columbia Supreme Court '''within 60 days''' of the date on which a decision is issued. Under certain circumstances, the court may extend the time for applying. Due to clear language in the ''Administrative Tribunal Act'', Judicial Review of WCAT decisions are held to the standard of patent unreasonableness on most questions (constitutional issues and questions of so-called true jurisdiction are exceptions). This is the highest level of judicial deference and limits the court's ability to interfere unless the decision was “openly, evidently, clearly wrong” (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1997/1997canlii385/1997canlii385.html~~?autocompleteStr=Canada%2520(Director%2520of%2520Investigation%2520and%2520Research)%2520v%2520Southam%2520Inc.%252C%2520%255B1997%255D%25201%2520S.C.R.%2520748&autocompletePos=1~~ Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) v Southam Inc.]'', [1997<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 748; ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html~~?autocompleteStr=Fraser%2520Health%2520Authority%2520v%2520Workers%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal%252C%25202016%2520SCC%252025&autocompletePos=1~~ Fraser Health]'', supra).		A party may apply for judicial review at the same time that they apply for a reconsideration of a decision from WCAT. A party must apply for judicial review of a WCAT decision by the British Columbia Supreme Court '''within 60 days''' of the date on which a decision is issued. Under certain circumstances, the court may extend the time for applying. Due to clear language in the ''Administrative Tribunal Act'', Judicial Review of WCAT decisions are held to the standard of patent unreasonableness on most questions (constitutional issues and questions of so-called true jurisdiction are exceptions). This is the highest level of judicial deference and limits the court's ability to interfere unless the decision was “openly, evidently, clearly wrong” (''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1997/1997canlii385/1997canlii385.html Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) v Southam Inc.]'', [1997<nowiki>]</nowiki> 1 S.C.R. 748; ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2016/2016scc25/2016scc25.html Fraser Health]'', supra).

	'''Possible judicial review cases should be referred to lawyers, as it is very difficult to file and conduct a judicial review case without a lawyer’s assistance.''' See [[Introduction to Public Complaints (5:I)\|'''Chapter 5: Public Complaints Procedures''']] for more information about judicial review.		'''Possible judicial review cases should be referred to lawyers, as it is very difficult to file and conduct a judicial review case without a lawyer’s assistance.''' See [[Introduction to Public Complaints (5:I)\|'''Chapter 5: Public Complaints Procedures''']] for more information about judicial review.
Line 101:		Line 101:
	Note that if Judicial Review and reconsideration are both possible, it is advisable for the worker to file their paperwork for Judicial Review within the 60-day time limit and then apply for reconsideration. This ensures that they will still be able to pursue Judicial Review if their reconsideration is denied.		Note that if Judicial Review and reconsideration are both possible, it is advisable for the worker to file their paperwork for Judicial Review within the 60-day time limit and then apply for reconsideration. This ensures that they will still be able to pursue Judicial Review if their reconsideration is denied.

	According to ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2017/2017bcca403/2017bcca403.html~~?autocompleteStr=Denton%2520v%2520British%2520Columbia%2520(Workers%25E2%2580%2599%2520Compensation%2520Appeal%2520Tribunal)%252C%25202017%2520BCCA%252040&autocompletePos=1~~ Denton v British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)]'', 2017 BCCA 40, where an appeal raises constitutional issues, those issues must be raised prior to the JR stage at the British Columbia Supreme Court. Both the Review Division and WCAT have the authority to hear constitutional issues.		According to ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2017/2017bcca403/2017bcca403.html Denton v British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)]'', 2017 BCCA 40, where an appeal raises constitutional issues, those issues must be raised prior to the JR stage at the British Columbia Supreme Court. Both the Review Division and WCAT have the authority to hear constitutional issues.

	== D. Access to Files ==		== D. Access to Files ==