The petitioner, Jim Edwards, applied for judicial review to quash a decision of the respondent Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) dated February 25, 2019. The petitioner sought a re-hearing of his claim for compensation benefits after sustaining a low back injury on February 8, 2017, during his employment with Shaw Communications Inc. The employer did not participate in the WCAT appeal or the judicial review. A Case Manager's decision terminated his benefits, concluding that the accident did not aggravate his pre-existing conditions. The Review Division upheld this decision. The Review Division consulted a medical advisor, Dr. Bulger, who diagnosed "acute on chronic back pain." The petitioner appealed to WCAT, which denied an aggravation of the pre-existing conditions but allowed continuing wage loss benefits. The court found the Panel's definition of the pre-existing condition was overly narrow and ignored alternative characterizations supported by medical evidence. It held that the Panel's decision on aggravation was patently unreasonable, as it set an impossibly high standard of requiring objective evidence of accelerated physical degeneration for compensation. The court remitted the matter to WCAT for reconsideration. Regarding the Panel's discretion not to seek further medical opinion, the court found it was not patently unreasonable. In summary, the court found the Panel's decision on aggravation was patently unreasonable due to its narrow interpretation of the pre-existing condition and failure to consider relevant medical evidence. The matter was remitted to WCAT for reconsideration, and the Panel's refusal to seek further medical opinion was deemed not patently unreasonable.