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 1691 16
8/8/2016
S. Darvish

  • In the course of employment (employer's premises)
  • In the course of employment (parking lots)
  • Right to sue

The plaintiff in a civil case was a worker of a company owned by her husband. The company's store was located in a commercial plaza that was operated as a condominium corporation. The condominium unit in which the store was located was owned by the plaintiff and her husband in the individual capacities. The plaintiff was injured when she slipped and fell in the parking lot adjacent to her car. The plaintiff brought an action against the condominium corporation. The defendant applied to determine whether the plaintiff's right of action was taken away. In determining whether an employer has control over parking premises, it is important to consider not only whether the employer actually exercises control but also whether the employer has the right to exercise control. In this case, the parking by-law of the condominium corporation assigned certain parking spaces at the rear of the building to the exclusive use of the owners. Two parking spaces were assigned for exclusive use of the company. The accident occurred as the plaintiff was about to get into her car, which was in one of those exclusive spaces. The Vice-Chair found that the company had the right to control the spaces and did, in fact, control the spaces. Thus, the parking spaces were an extension of the employer's premises. The Vice-Chair concluded that the plaintiff was a worker in the course of employment at the time of the accident. Her right of action was taken away.