Digests

VETERANS

Judicial review of Veterans Review and Appeal Board decision maintaining Entitlement Review Panel decision reducing by 2/5 disability pension of applicant—Applicant, wife, members of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)—Applicant’s wife victim of sustained sexual, psychological harassment by superiors, ultimately making her unable to work—Therefore initiating legal proceedings against RCMP—RCMP apparently wanting applicant to persuade wife to abandon legal proceedings against it— Applicant refusing, in turn harassed, abused by superiors—Applicant ceasing to work, eventually recognised as permanently disabled due to anxiety, depression—Applying for disability pension, but application denied by Minister of Veterans Affairs on basis no evidence showing disability arising directly out of service with RCMP, disability rather caused by wife’s situation—On appeal, Panel awarding applicant pension, but reducing it by 2/5 on basis wife’s problems with RCMP, appearing to be at root of applicant’s condition, related to own personal life—Pension Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. P-6, s. 21(2)(a) stipulating that when member of RCMP suffering from disability that arose out of, was directly connected with service, pension shall be awarded—Terms “arose out of” understood as not requiring direct causal link—Those words only requiring “some nexus or causal relationship” (Amos v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 405)—Evidence clearly supporting finding that applicant’s disability “arose out of” his service with RCMP—Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, S.C. 1995, c. 18, s. 39(c) providing that Board shall resolve in favour of applicant any doubt, in weighing of evidence, as to whether applicant establishing case— Board’s doubt herein should have been resolved in favour of applicant—Application allowed.

Lebrasseur v. Canada (Attorney General) (T-944-09, 2010 FC 98, Tremblay-Lamer J., judgment dated January 28, 2010, 10 pp.)