Highlights of Noteworthy Decisions

Decision 2096 18 R
26/06/2019
G. Dee
  • Reconsideration (error of law)
  • Standard of proof

The worker applied for reconsideration of Decision No. 2096/18.

The worker submitted that the hearing panel erred in stating that the standard of proof was the balance of probabilities and that the benefit of doubt should be resolved in favour of the claimant if it is impracticable to decide an issue because the evidence for and against the issue is approximately equal in weight. The worker submitted, based on the Supreme Court decision in British Columbia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Fraser Health Authority, is not the civil standard of balance of probabilities.
The Vice-Chair found that the Supreme Court clearly stated that the standard of proof was not the civil standard of balance of probabilities but that the Court did not provide a positive description of the actual standard, except by stating how the benefit of doubt provisions modified the civil standard.
Given the reasoning the Supreme Court, the Vice-Chair found it appropriate to describe the standard of proof in workers' compensation proceedings to be the civil standard of the balance of probabilities, but modified by the requirements of the benefit of doubt provisions. This is what the hearing panel in Decision No. 2096/18 was clearly doing.
The application to reconsider was denied.