The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company v. B.

Ontario (Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development) v. Greater Sudbury (City)

OHSA Appeal: Due Diligence and Standard of Review

An appeal of convictions under the Occupational Health and Safety Act against the City of Sudbury for alleged failures to ensure workplace safety. The court addressed the standard of review for OHSA prosecutions, finding that questions of law are reviewed on a correctness standard while mixed questions of fact and law are reviewed for palpable and overriding error. The appeal was allowed and acquittals entered because the trial judge's findings were unsupported by evidence and based on speculation.

L. v. K.

This is a judicial review application concerning the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal's (WSIAT) decisions on workers' compensation matters. The applicant challenged the tribunal's procedural fairness in separating Charter and Human Rights Code issues, its jurisdiction to defer entitlements pending WSIB review, the use of medical discussion papers, and allegations of bias. The Divisional Court found the tribunal's processes reasonable, fair, and consistent with the WSIA.

S. v. Queen’s University

Workplace Investigation Independence: OHS Act Injunction Refused

This is an interlocutory proceeding concerning an application for interim relief and a mandatory order related to an investigation under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The court applied the RJR-MacDonald test to determine whether to grant an injunction or mandatory order to compel or restrain an investigation, ultimately refusing relief as the balance of convenience favored the statutory duty to investigate and irreparable harm was speculative.

K. v. Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal

Judicial Review of WSIAT Decision on Workplace Injury

This is a judicial review application concerning the reasonableness of the WSIAT's decision on a worker's entitlement to compensation for workplace injuries. The Divisional Court reviewed the Tribunal's assessment of medical evidence and its refusal to grant reconsideration.

D. v. B.

Police Officer Tort Claim vs Discipline Proceedings

This is a procedural ruling on a motion to strike where the plaintiff, a police officer, sought to pursue tort claims linked to internal police discipline proceedings. The court determined it had residual jurisdiction because the dispute had moved beyond the collective agreement into the criminal justice system, and rejected arguments that statutory privilege barred the civil claims.