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.

Ontario Government | Ministry of Labour | Site Map | Accessibility | text resize: A A A

Home | About Us | OWT Library | Forms | Practice Directions | Decision Search | Contact Us | Fran├žais

Established in 1985, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT) is the final level of appeal to which workers and employers may bring disputes concerning workplace safety and insurance matters in Ontario. WSIAT has always been separate from and independent of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

Questions?

Decisions

Appeal Process

For Representatives

Finding a Representative

Documents & Publications

Legal/Medical Resources

Popular Topics

Links to Other Agencies

Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

  Decision 427 14 R
6/17/2016
G. Dee

  • Issue setting
  • Reconsideration (consideration of issue)

The worker applied for reconsideration of Decision No. 427/14. The worker's representative submitted that, in the original decision, the Vice-Chair did not deal with the issue of entitlement to partial LOE benefits from May 2010 to September 2011.
This issue raised by the representative was not listed in the Hearing Ready letter that confirmed the issues under appeal. The representative did not identify any problem with the issue agenda after receiving the Hearing Ready letter.
Further, at the beginning of the hearing, the issue agenda was discussed with both representatives. Both representatives agreed that the issues identified in the Hearing Ready letter were the issues to be dealt with at the hearing.
The Vice-Chair noted that identification of the issues in dispute at the start of a hearing is not a simple formality. Rather, it is the opportunity for all parties to define the matter that will be subject of the decision.
There was no significant defect in the administrative process or content of the original decision. The application to reconsider was denied.
The Vice-Chair noted that, although the original decision did not deal with the issue of entitlement to LOE benefits from May 2010 to September 2011, it did make some findings that were contrary to the conclusions of the Appeals Resolution Officer, in that it found that the worker had an ongoing compensable impairment past May 2010. Thus, the decision did not preclude further consideration of this issue by the Board in light of the findings in Decision No. 427/14.