Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 OCTOBER 2025

Objective Evidence, Not Bystander Reaction, Key In Workplace Psych Injuries: Alberta Decision

Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Contributor
Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones LLP

Bennett Jones is one of Canada’s premier business law firms. With deep experience in complex...

View firm profile
Explore more from Bennett Jones LLP

Jenna Vivian was recently interviewed for the Canadian HR Reporter article, "Objective evidence, not bystander reaction, key in workplace psych injuries: Alberta decision."

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Jenna Vivian
Jenna Vivian
Author LinkedIn connections

Jenna Vivianwas recently interviewed for theCanadian HR Reporterarticle, "Objective evidence, not bystander reaction, key in workplace psych injuries: Alberta decision." The article discusses an Alberta Appeals Commission decision emphasizing that objective medical evidence, not coworkers' or bystanders' reactions, should determine whether a worker has experienced a compensable psychological injury. The case involved a worker who claimed trauma after witnessing a violent workplace incident, but the commission ruled the evidence did not meet the diagnostic criteria required for compensation. Jenna explains that the decision underscores the need for objective medical documentation and reinforces that psychological injury claims must satisfy strict evidentiary and legal standards.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Can An Arbitration Agreement Preclude Appeals, Even With Errors Of Law?

An Ontario court ruled that arbitration agreements containing "final and binding" language may prevent parties from appealing legal errors made by arbitrators. The decision examines how a $3 million construction dispute was resolved through arbitration, and why the losing party could not challenge the arbitrator's legal mistakes despite their significant financial impact.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
McCarthy Tétrault
McCarthy Tétrault
Article

Boeing and Securities Class Certification: Trends in the United States and Canada

A U.S. appeals court has unanimously overturned certification of a securities class action against Boeing, establishing that plaintiffs must demonstrate a workable, class-wide damages methodology at the certification stage. This decision reinforces heightened standards for class certification that parallel evolving requirements in Canadian securities litigation, where courts increasingly demand concrete evidence and specific liability theories before approving class actions.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
Article

Lessons In Suing Securities Regulators: Herner v. Mutual Fund Dealers Association And Ontario Securities Commission, 2026 ONSC 4889

A mutual fund dealing representative sued the MFDA and OSC for $47.5 million in damages, alleging intentional torts including conspiracy, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution stemming from a regulatory investigation and enforcement proceedings. The 21-day trial resulted in complete dismissal of all claims, with the court making significant findings on regulatory immunity provisions and the scope of duties owed by securities regulators to regulated persons.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Crawley MacKewn Brush LLP
Article

Landmark SCC Ruling Provides Clarity On Privative Clauses

The Supreme Court of Canada has delivered a landmark ruling declaring section 66 of the Conflict of Interest Act unconstitutional, fundamentally reshaping the boundaries between legislative authority and judicial oversight of administrative decisions. This unanimous decision addresses longstanding questions about the validity of privative clauses that restrict courts' ability to review findings by Parliament's ethics commissioner.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Torys
Torys
Article

OPC Issues New PIPEDA Guidance On Assessing Third-Party Service Providers

Canada's privacy regulator has released new draft guidance establishing comprehensive due diligence standards for organizations evaluating third-party service providers under PIPEDA. The framework introduces eleven best practices covering everything from data flow mapping and AI training data sourcing to vendor lock-in risks and ongoing monitoring obligations, signaling heightened expectations for privacy accountability in vendor relationships.
CanadaPrivacy
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

Government Of Canada Reduces The Scope Of The Project List Under The Impact Assessment Act

The Government of Canada has amended the Physical Activities Regulations, removing certain intraprovincial energy projects and facilities regulated by the Canada Energy Regulator from the federal Impact Assessment Act's Project List. This regulatory change eliminates automatic federal oversight for fossil fuel-fired power plants and specific oil sands facilities, while transferring assessment responsibilities for interprovincial pipelines and transmission lines to the Canada Energy Regulator, potentially re
CanadaEnergy and Natural Resources
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

BC Court Of Appeal: No Basis In Fact = No Class Action

The BC Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the courts' gatekeeping role at certification, upholding a lower court's refusal to certify a privacy class action where plaintiffs failed to provide any evidentiary basis for their central allegation that shopping mall directory software recorded facial images and converted them into biometric data. This decision clarifies the evidentiary burden required to satisfy the "some basis in fact" standard at the certification stage in British Columbia.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

Notice Concerning The Quota For Imports Of Chinese Electric Vehicles

The Government of Canada has introduced new rules governing the second allocation period for electric vehicle imports from China, increasing the available quota to 33,397 vehicles while maintaining strict permit requirements and a first-come, first-served allocation system. Global Affairs Canada signals potential intervention measures to ensure equitable access, particularly for original equipment manufacturers and new market entrants navigating this highly regulated import regime.
WorldwideInternational Law
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

RSU Forfeiture Revisited: Ontario Court Of Appeal Provides Important Guidance For Employers

The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled that employees are entitled to continued vesting of RSUs and equity-based compensation during the statutory notice period, striking down forfeiture provisions that attempt to end vesting immediately upon termination. In a landmark decision awarding Dr. Wigdor nearly US$4.7 million in unvested RSUs, the Court clarified that equity compensation constitutes a "term or condition of employment" protected under the Employment Standards Act. What does this mean for employers w
CanadaEmployment and HR
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

Canada's Response To Trump: Tariffs And Relief Measures

Following the Trump administration's imposition of 50% tariffs on Canadian exports worth C$27.6 billion, Prime Minister Carney has announced comprehensive countermeasures targeting American goods. The Canadian response includes dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs ranging from 15% to 50% on US products, alongside C$7.5 billion in support programs for affected workers and businesses. What relief measures and remission frameworks are available to Canadian importers navigating this escalating trade dispute?
CanadaInternational Law
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

"At Any Time" And "For Any Reason" Is Here To Stay

The Court of Appeal for Ontario has resolved conflicting lower court decisions on employment termination clauses, clarifying when language permitting termination "at any time" or "for any reason" remains enforceable under provincial employment standards legislation. This landmark ruling establishes new interpretive principles that will reshape how courts evaluate the validity of termination provisions in employment agreements across Ontario's non-union workplaces.
CanadaEmployment and HR
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP