2,734
edits
Difference between revisions of "Governing Legislation, Policy and Guidelines for Workers' Compensation (7:II)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Governing Legislation, Policy and Guidelines for Workers' Compensation (7:II) (view source)
Revision as of 19:39, 13 December 2022
, 19:39, 13 December 2022→C. Binding Policy: Standard of Proof and Evidence
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
Sections 339 (2) and (3) of the WCA (Former Act, s. 99) require that the Board “make its decision based on the merits and justice of the case, but in doing this the Board must apply the policies of the board of directors that are applicable in that case” and “if the Board is making a decision respecting the compensation or rehabilitation of a worker and the evidence supporting different findings on an issue is evenly weighted in that case, the Board must resolve that issue in a manner that favours the worker”. This means that in WCB cases there is a unique standard of proof. Where a case is 50-50, it should be resolved in favour of the worker (an “as likely as not” standard). This is less than the standard of proof used in civil claims. The civil standard is on a balance of probabilities (“more likely than not” or 50% +1). | Sections 339 (2) and (3) of the WCA (Former Act, s. 99) require that the Board “make its decision based on the merits and justice of the case, but in doing this the Board must apply the policies of the board of directors that are applicable in that case” and “if the Board is making a decision respecting the compensation or rehabilitation of a worker and the evidence supporting different findings on an issue is evenly weighted in that case, the Board must resolve that issue in a manner that favours the worker”. This means that in WCB cases there is a unique standard of proof. Where a case is 50-50, it should be resolved in favour of the worker (an “as likely as not” standard). This is less than the standard of proof used in civil claims. The civil standard is on a balance of probabilities (“more likely than not” or 50% +1). | ||
In practice, Board policy confines, or attempts to confine, the nature of relevant evidence and provides the framework for how evidence is to be assessed and weighed. | In practice, Board policy confines, or attempts to confine, the nature of relevant evidence and provides the framework for how evidence is to be assessed and weighed. Therefore, in appeals, it is important to identify the correct applicable Board policy whether or not it is identified in the initial Board decision. | ||
== D. Non-Binding Guidance == | == D. Non-Binding Guidance == | ||
