Lockyer-Kash v. Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia

Lockyer-Kash v. Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia

Appeal allowed and certification set aside because a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure: the court's proper role in judicial review is limited to assessing whether the board policy is patently unreasonable and remitting the matter to the board; certification could not substitute for individual...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2015 BCCA 70
Parties
Respondent (petitioner): Deborah Lockyer-Kash; Appellant (respondent): Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Certification of Class Proceeding and Judicial Review Petition / Appeal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; certification order set aside and certification application dismissed
Legal Topics
Certification of Class Proceeding, Patent Unreasonableness, Interest on Retroactive Awards, Exhaustion of Internal Remedies, Limitation Periods, Preferable Procedure Test
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Class Actions Workers' Compensation Law Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation Certification of Class Proceeding Patent Unreasonableness Interest on Retroactive Awards +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deborah Lockyer-Kash

Respondent (petitioner)

Workers' Compensation Board of British Columbia

Appellant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Certification of Class Proceeding and Judicial Review Petition / Appeal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judicial review petition could be certified as a class proceeding under the Class Proceedings Act
  2. 2 Whether a class proceeding is the preferable procedure versus a stand-alone judicial review
  3. 3 Whether the court can determine entitlement to interest as part of compensation or must limit its role to assessing patent unreasonableness and remitting to the board

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal allowed and certification set aside because a class proceeding was not the preferable procedure: the court's proper role in judicial review is limited to assessing whether the board policy is patently unreasonable and remitting the matter to the board; certification could not substitute for individual exhaustion of internal remedies or override limitation periods, and a class action would not fairly or efficiently resolve individual entitlement to interest on retroactive awards.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; certification order set aside and certification application dismissed

Orders

  • Set aside the chambers judge's certification order dated July 29, 2014
  • Dismiss the application to certify the proceeding as a class proceeding