SUPREME COURT OF CANADA - APPEALS HEARD

OTTAWA, 9/12/02. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA ANNOUNCED TODAY
THAT THE FOLLOWING APPEALS WERE HEARD ON DECEMBER 9, 2002.

SOURCE: SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (613) 995-4330

COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA - APPELS ENTENDUS

OTTAWA, 9/12/02. LA COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA A ANNONCÉ
AUJOURD'HUI QUE LES APPELS SUIVANTS ONT ÉTÉ ENTENDUS LE 9
DÉCEMBRE 2002.

SOURCE: COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA (613) 995-4330

COMMENTS/COMMENTAIRES: comments@scc-csc.gc.ca

1. RUTH A. LASEUR v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD OF NOVA
SCOTIA, ET AL. (N.S.) (Civil) (By Leave) (28370)

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

2. DONALD MARTIN v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD OF NOVA
SCOTIA, ET AL. (N.S.) (Civil) (By Leave) (28372)

RESERVED / EN DÉLIBÉRÉ

28370 Ruth A. Laseur v. Workers' Compensation Board of Nova
Scotia et al

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Administrative
Tribunals - Authority to apply the Charter - Equality Rights -
Workers' Compensation - Whether the Worker's Compensation
Appeals Tribunal of Nova Scotia has the authority to refuse on
Charter grounds to apply benefits provisions of its enabling statute
- Whether the chronic pain provisions of the Worker's
Compensation Act, S.N.S. 1994-95, c.10, and the Functional
Restoration (Multi-Faceted Pain Services) Program Regulations,
N.S. Reg.57/96 infringe the equality rights guaranteed under section
15(1) of the Charter - If they do, whether such infringement can be
justified pursuant to s. 1 of the Charter.

The Appellant, Ruth Laseur, was employed as a bus driver in Nova
Scotia. On November 13, 1987, she climbed up onto the front bumper of
her bus in order to clean the windshield. She fell and reported bruising
her right hand and wrenching her back. The accident was reported to
the Workers' Compensation Board (the "Board"). She returned to work
after ten days. With occasional days off due to back pain, she worked
until February 16, 1988. From February 16 to May 1, 1988, she received
temporary total disability benefits. She returned to work for a month
and then again received compensation from June 13 to August 8, 1988.
She returned to work again in August for several months with days off
due to back pain as well as a hospital admission for a myelogram in
November. In March, 1989, she again stopped working and received
compensation from March 16 to April 13 and May 29 through July 24,
1989. The benefits were then extended to October 30 but terminated as
of that date. The Appellant continued to pursue her workers'
compensation claim and returned to work part time on February 23,
1990. The Appellant worked part-time until April 10, 1990, when her
employer required her to return to full-time hours. This aggravated her
back pain. She stopped work on April 18 and returned to work on a
part-time basis until July 30. Subsequently, her family doctor ordered her
to stop working again.

In October of 1990, the Workers' Compensation Appeal Board (as it
then was called), awarded the Appellant temporary total disability
benefits for the periods of October 31, 1989 to February 22, 1990 and
from April 18, 1990 to July 2, 1990, 50% temporary partial disability
benefits from February 23 to April 10, 1990 and July 3 to July 30, 1990
and temporary total disability payments from August 1 until an
assessment could be carried out for a permanent partial disability. The
Appellant attended for an estimation of her permanent medical
impairment (PMI) on January 17, 1991. A permanent partial disability
award was denied.

The Appellant continued to seek permanent partial disability benefits
retroactive to January 1991. On August 12, 1994, the Board rejected her
claim, stating that "...she probably has a full blown chronic pain
syndrome, which is a non-compensable condition and is well known to
be virtually totally related to psychosocial factors." The Appellant
appealed to a Hearing Officer and then to the Workers' Compensation
Appeal Tribunal (the "WCAT"). She raised a Charter argument
challenging s. 10B of the Workers' Compensation Act, S.N.S. 1994-95, c.
10. The WCAT allowed the appeal in part, but held that the Appellant
was not entitled to either a permanent impairment benefit or to
vocational rehabilitation benefits. The Board appealed the WCAT's
Charter decisions and the Appellant cross-appealed, challenging the
"zero-rating" for her permanent impairment. The Nova Scotia Court of
Appeal allowed the Board's appeal and dismissed the Appellant's
cross-appeal.

Origin of the case: Nova Scotia

File No.: 28370

Judgment of the Court of Appeal: November 8, 2000

Counsel: Anne S. Clark/Kenny LeBlanc/Anne Derrick for the Appellant

Brian A. Crane/David P.S. Farrar/Janet E. Curry for the Respondent
Workers' Compensation Board

John P. Merrick/Louanne Labelle/Janet M. Stevenson for the Respondent
Nova Scotia WCAT