What is the standard for evaluating the credibility and reliability of evidence?

The standard for evaluating the credibility and reliability of evidence was established in the case of Faryna v. Chorny[2]. In cases where there is conflict of evidence, credibility cannot be gauged solely on the test of the conviction of a witness; the worker’s belief as to what occurred. A decision-maker must test a worker’s story to examine its consistency with the probabilities that surround the currently existing conditions; the story must be in harmony with the preponderance of the probabilities that a practical and informed person would readily recognize as reasonable in the circumstances. In my view, the preponderance of probabilities in this case does not support the conclusion the worker had neck and bilateral shoulder/arm symptoms following the work activities of December 2009. I accept this is the worker’s genuine belief today. I also accept that he felt pain in his neck and arms when he complained to his doctors from 2011 onward. However, the preponderance of probabilities indicates the worker did not have ongoing symptoms in his neck and shoulders/arms from 2009 to the present. The worker sought regular medical attention from both his own doctor and specialists from August 2010 onward and did not mention neck or arm symptoms until one year later (mid 2011). Then, when he was receiving treatment from a variety of specialists in 2011, even when he was being examined by an orthopaedic surgeon for the purpose of establishing the injuries which were caused by the work of December 2009, the worker only mentioned his neck and arm complaints occasionally. I find those circumstances inconsistent with the worker’s evidence that he felt neck and arm symptoms continuously since December 2009, gradually worsening over time.