The Board’s Noteworthy Decisions are also available on the Canadian Legal Information Institute's (CanLII) website. Opens in a new window.
Interest Decisions determine issues of law of general public interest or importance. They provide a general example of the application of legislation, regulations, policies, or various adjudicative principles. They also tend to illustrate a broad range of medical or legal issues which are commonly encountered in cases heard by the Board. These decisions are not binding on Members because every decision is based on the specific facts and evidence of a particular case.
Leading and Persuasive Decisions provide interpretive guidance and persuasive commentary on issues of law, policy, or procedure. They identify a reasoned analysis, approach, or set of principles that will tend to be applied by the Board when determining certain issues. These decisions are not binding on Members because every decision is based on the specific facts and evidence of a particular case.
Interpretation Decisions clarify issues of interpretation of legislation, policy, or procedure. They establish binding precedents for those questions of law which have been determined in the decisions.
For more information about Noteworthy Decisions, please read the backgrounder.
The official version of a decision is the original signed copy that is placed in the applicant’s file. The electronic copies posted on this site represent electronic reproductions of the official decisions. As such, they may contain typographical variations and will have a slightly different appearance (layout, spacing, font, etc.). Additionally, some personal information has been removed to protect individuals’ privacy.
How the Board depersonalizes decisions
To balance openness in decision-making with applicants’ privacy, the Board has chosen to remove personal information that is not relevant to the reasons for the decision. This includes names of the applicant or appellant and non-expert witnesses, as well as other information that could identify the individual (e.g. service or file numbers or home address). A published decision may contain some information that is relevant to the reasons, such as:
This approach is consistent with the declaration (Opens a New Window) of the Heads of Federal Administrative Tribunals Forum (of which the Board is a member) and the principles found in the "Use of Personal Information in Judgments and Recommended Protocol" (Opens a New Window) approved by the Canadian Judicial Council.