Fushtey v Workers’ Compensation Board of Alberta
Kimberley Fushtey as Litigation Representative of the Estate of Darryl Alexander Fushtey
Law Firm / Organization
Vogel LLP
Appeals Commission for the Workers’ Compensation Board of Alberta
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

Christie Webber

Workers’ Compensation Board of Alberta
Lawyer(s)

Bryanna White

Codeco-Vanoco Engineering Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

Mohammad Ahmad

Mourad Group Inc.
Law Firm / Organization
McLennan Ross LLP
Lawyer(s)

Blake P. Hafso

Blue Chip Leasing Corporation
Law Firm / Organization
McLennan Ross LLP
Lawyer(s)

Blake P. Hafso

  • Incident: Darryl Fushtey died in a car accident in 2018 while traveling to evaluate a business opportunity with Fire Power, an oilfield safety services company. The Workers' Compensation Board (WCB) deemed the accident employment-related, granting compensation. His estate argued it was a personal investment trip, seeking to bypass the statutory bar under Section 23 of the Workers’ Compensation Act to pursue a civil claim.

  • Legal Issues:

    1. Was Mr. Fushtey acting under his employer Codeco’s direction or pursuing personal interests?
      • The WCB and Appeals Commission found the trip was part of his role as Business Development Executive, benefitting Codeco.
      • The estate argued it was unrelated to his employment.
    2. Did Section 16(1)(d), which excludes coverage for partners in a partnership, apply?
      • The Appeals Commission found Mr. Fushtey was acting under Codeco’s direction, not as part of a partnership.
    3. Was the “but for” test of causation misapplied?
      • The estate claimed coverage required sole employment purposes. The Commission found the trip’s primary purpose was work-related.
  • Court Findings:

    • The issues involved mixed fact and law, reviewed for reasonableness.
    • The Appeals Commission reasonably concluded that Mr. Fushtey’s travel was employer-directed and primarily benefitted Codeco.
    • Section 16(1)(d) was irrelevant, and the Commission properly applied the causation test.
  • Outcome: The court upheld the Appeals Commission’s decision, maintaining the statutory bar to civil claims and dismissing the estate’s applications.

  • The decision does not explicitly specify any monetary award, costs, or damages.

Court of King's Bench of Alberta
2301 05102
Employment law
Respondent