A worker was killed in a car accident while traveling to assess a business opportunity for his employer. The employer reported the accident to the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB), which accepted it as work-related. Counsel for the worker’s estate (the Estate) contacted WCB with instructions to investigate WCB’s decision that the accident arose in the course of employment. The Estate later contested this, claiming the worker was pursuing a personal investment opportunity, not acting in the course of employment. The Estate sought to have WCB deny coverage as doing so would remove the statutory limit under the Workers’ Compensation Act, RSA 2000, c W-15 (Act), leaving the Estate able to pursue a civil cause of action.

At the Estate’s request, the WCB decision went through a process of internal reviews, including a review by WCB’s Dispute Resolution and Decision Review Body (DRDRB). The DRDRB upheld WCB’s decision that the accident happened because of work. The Estate then appealed the DRDRB decision to the Appeals Commission for Workers’ Compensation (Appeals Commission) under the Act. The Appeals Commission upheld the decision by WCB (Appeal Decision).

The Estate filed both a Statutory Appeal of the Appeal Decision and an Application for Judicial Review. The Court noted that there are important distinctions between the two, including procedural distinctions, the nature of the Court’s inquiry and the applicable Standard of Review. The Court was satisfied that the issues raised by the Estate fell outside of the scope of a Statutory Appeal under the Act, as they were not questions of law. The Court therefore went on to consider the issues in the context of the Estate’s Judicial Review proceedings. In doing so, the Court found that the Appeal Commission’s decision was rational and logical.

Therefore, the Court dismissed the Estate’s Applications.