“Within a reasonable amount of time” is intentionally flexible in LTI (long-term illness or injury) leave provisions, because legislators recognize that medical circumstances don’t unfold on a fixed timeline. In general, an employee’s obligation to provide a medical certificate is balanced against the realities of accessing health care, the severity of the condition, and the employee’s capacity to comply. Tribunals and courts have consistently interpreted “reasonable” to mean as soon as practicable in the circumstances, rather than immediately or within a rigid number of days.

Supportive guidance from employment standards decisions and arbitral case law shows that delays are more likely to be considered reasonable when they are connected to factors outside the employee’s control—such as difficulty securing a timely medical appointment, hospitalization, recovery from surgery, or cognitive or psychological impairment. Conversely, delays may be considered unreasonable where an employee is medically able, has been clearly informed of the requirement, has access to a health-care provider, and still fails to provide documentation without explanation or communication. Employers are generally expected to assess reasonableness case-by-case, rather than applying blanket timelines.

Importantly, decision-makers tend to look at conduct, not just elapsed time. An employee who communicates regularly, explains delays, or provides interim information is far less likely to be found unreasonable—even if the certificate itself arrives weeks later. By contrast, silence or refusal to cooperate, especially after reminders, can weigh against the employee. Many rulings emphasize that employers should request documentation proportionately and allow extensions where circumstances justify them.

As a best practice, employers can reduce ambiguity by clearly documenting requests, setting indicative (but flexible) timeframes (e.g., “within 7–14 days where possible”), and inviting employees to advise if they are unable to meet them. This approach aligns with human rights and employment standards principles and is more defensible than treating any fixed delay as automatically unreasonable.

I hope this helps!
-HRInsider Staff