- Hearing (oral)
- Issue setting
- Jurisdiction, Tribunal
- Procedure (interim decision)
- Tribunal counsel
- Medical report (Tribunal medical discussion paper)
- Procedure (Case Record) (contents)
- Procedure (Charter of Rights issue)
- Summons (to expert)
In this interim procedural decision, the Panel confirmed there was nothing inappropriate about Tribunal Counsel's decision to include a discussion paper in the appeal record, regardless of whether the worker agreed with that decision. It was noted that the objective in adding material to the appeal record is not to assist or oppose any particular party to an appeal, but to increase the availability of relevant evidence to parties and panels when appeals are determined, in order to enhance the quality of decision-making at the Tribunal. The discussion papers are considered to be evidence of a general nature that parties to an appeal are free to dispute through the provision of alternative evidence and submissions.
In addition, the Panel denied the worker's request to subpoena employees of the WSIB and the Appeals Tribunal, as well as the authors of the Medical Discussion Paper included in the appeal record. The Panel stated it was not aware of any prior decisions by the Tribunal finding it necessary to subpoena the individuals specified in order to reach a decision in an appeal on the merits of an appeal. There was nothing in this present appeal to indicate that a departure from this approach was necessary. In addition, the Tribunal's Practice Direction on Expert Evidence contains the following statement: "5.2 Oral testimony from an expert witness is extremely rare before the Tribunal. It is not the Tribunal's practice to hear oral expert evidence from an expert witness. A written report is usually sufficient."