What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant was involved in an automobile accident on July 13, 2022, and reported it to employer but misled employer about details.
Favours neutral
This fact relates to whether employer had notice of injury prior to termination under the post-termination defense.
From the decision · page 2In this matter, applicant was involved in automobile accident on July 13, 2022. Applicant
reported the accident but apparently misled the employer regarding the details of the accident. In
an incident report completed two days after the accident, applicant wrote "none" under the "Name
of Injured Person" and checked off that he would like to "postpone or not seek medical treatment
at this time." Applicant continued to work his regular hours until the employer allegedly
determined that applicant lied about the details of the accident. Applicant was then terminated.
Applicant testified at trial that he "had ongoing pain to his tailbone and lower back area. He was
asked whether he ever reported having pain to the company. He says he did report something
before getting terminated, but they seemed more concerned about the accident itself. [Supervisor]
Jaime did not offer to send him to a doctor, and he did not give him a claim form." (Minutes of
Hearing and Summary of Evidence of October 20, 2025 trial at p. 5.)
Applicant continued to work regular hours until employer determined applicant lied about accident details and then terminated him.
Favours neutral
This fact is relevant to timing of notice and termination under the post-termination defense.
From the decision · page 2In this matter, applicant was involved in automobile accident on July 13, 2022. Applicant
reported the accident but apparently misled the employer regarding the details of the accident. In
an incident report completed two days after the accident, applicant wrote "none" under the "Name
of Injured Person" and checked off that he would like to "postpone or not seek medical treatment
at this time." Applicant continued to work his regular hours until the employer allegedly
determined that applicant lied about the details of the accident. Applicant was then terminated.
Applicant testified at trial that he "had ongoing pain to his tailbone and lower back area. He was
asked whether he ever reported having pain to the company. He says he did report something
before getting terminated, but they seemed more concerned about the accident itself. [Supervisor]
Jaime did not offer to send him to a doctor, and he did not give him a claim form." (Minutes of
Hearing and Summary of Evidence of October 20, 2025 trial at p. 5.)
Applicant testified he had ongoing pain before termination but employer did not offer medical treatment or claim form.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This fact bears on whether employer had notice of injury prior to termination.
From the decision · page 2In this matter, applicant was involved in automobile accident on July 13, 2022. Applicant
reported the accident but apparently misled the employer regarding the details of the accident. In
an incident report completed two days after the accident, applicant wrote "none" under the "Name
of Injured Person" and checked off that he would like to "postpone or not seek medical treatment
at this time." Applicant continued to work his regular hours until the employer allegedly
determined that applicant lied about the details of the accident. Applicant was then terminated.
Applicant testified at trial that he "had ongoing pain to his tailbone and lower back area. He was
asked whether he ever reported having pain to the company. He says he did report something
before getting terminated, but they seemed more concerned about the accident itself. [Supervisor]
Jaime did not offer to send him to a doctor, and he did not give him a claim form." (Minutes of
Hearing and Summary of Evidence of October 20, 2025 trial at p. 5.)