Chestacow v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal)

Background: Lucy Chestacow, a resident care attendant, injured her knee at work in 2015. She claimed verbal, physical, and sexual harassment during a work meeting on February 23, 2016. Her compensation claim for mental and physical injuries was denied by the Workers' Compensation Board and subsequently by WCAT.

Legal Proceedings: Chestacow filed a judicial review petition challenging the WCAT decision as unreasonable and procedurally unfair, alleging bias and bad faith. She requested WCAT to produce various documents under R. 7-1 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, which the chambers judge denied, considering the request speculative and a "fishing expedition."

Issues on Appeal:

1. Did the judge err in not requiring WCAT to comply with R. 7-1 of the SCCR?
2. Did the judge’s order violate Chestacow’s right to a fair hearing?

Court of Appeal Findings:

• The court typically reviews the tribunal's existing record, and document production beyond this is rare.
• The judge's reliance on inherent jurisdiction over Rule 7-1 did not prejudice the appellant.
• Chestacow's request lacked an evidentiary basis, making it speculative.
• The petition did not engage s. 7 Charter rights, and standard evidentiary rules were applied justly.

Decision: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the chambers judge's decision denying document production. No Costs/Monetary award specified.