This message is displayed because client-side scripting is turned off or not supported in the browser you are currently using.
Please turn on client-side scripting or install a browser that supports client-side scripting.

WSIAT | Decision Search Results
Home | About Us | OWT Library | Forms | Practice Directions | Decision Search | Contact Us | Français
 

Questions | Decisions | Appeal Process | For Representatives | Finding a Representative
Documents & Publications | Legal/Medical Resources | Popular Topics | Links to Other Agencies

About WSIAT Decisions

Decision Search

How to Search WSIAT Decisions

Noteworthy Decisions

Decision Search Results

Searching, please wait...

Displaying 1 to 2 of 2 Summaries
Decision No. 2691 08 27-Nov-2009 A. Patterson - M. Christie - D. Broadbent

  • Exposure (asbestos)

  • Cancer (rectum)


  • The worker was a pipefitter and welder from 1969 to 1992. He was diagnosed with cancer of the rectum in 1992. The worker submitted that the cancer was related to workplace exposure to asbestos. The worker appealed a decision of the Appeals Resolution Officer denying entitlement.

    Board Operational Policy Manual, Document No. 16-02-11, provides that claims are favourably considered if there is 1) a clear and adequate history of occupational exposure to asbestos dust that is of a continuous and repetitive nature and that represents a major component of the occupational activity and 2) there is a minimum latency period of 20 years between first exposure to asbestos and diagnosis.

    The Panel reviewed the worker’s work history. He started working in 1969, and used asbestos gloves and blankets. This met the second requirement of the Board policy. The Panel noted that the latency requirement of the policy did not indicate that the exposure had to be asbestos dust, that the exposure had to be continuous and repetitive or that it represent a major component of occupational activity.

    Regarding the first requirement of the policy, the Panel found that the worker had continuous and repetitive exposure that represented a major component of occupational activity only for a period of about 16 months in 1975 and 1976. The exposure from the asbestos gloves and blankets was not a significant source of asbestos dust. This was far below a recommendation from the Board’s Medical and Occupational Disease Policy Branch of a 15-year history of continuous and repetitive exposure.

    The worker did not have entitlement for the cancer. The appeal was dismissed.
    View Full Decision Text 14 Page(s)

    References:Act Citation
  • WCA


  • Other Case Reference
  • [w0210s]

  • BOARD DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES: Operational Policy Manual, Document No. 16-02-11

  • CROSS-REFERENCE: Decision No. 2691/08I

  • TRIBUNAL DECISIONS CONSIDERED: 211 distd, 535/00 distd, 1131/06 distd

  • Neutral Citation:2009 ONWSIAT 2766

    Decision No. 2691 08 I 19-Dec-2008 A. Patterson - M. Christie - D. Broadbent

  • Three week rule (witnesses)


  • No Summary Available
    View Full Decision Text 5 Page(s)

    References:Act Citation
  • WSIA


  • Other Case Reference
  • [w0709n]

  • CROSS-REFERENCE: Decision No. 2691/08

  • Neutral Citation:2008 ONWSIAT 3338

    Refine Search
     to:
     Reported Decisions Only
     Noteworthy Decisions Only
     Summarized Decisions Only
     Decision Summary                Style Of Cause
     Structured Keywords             Neutral Citation
     References

    Click here to start search Click here to reset the form Clear Form for New Search     Click here to do a structured keyword search Click here to open help