King v. Canada ( Veterans Review and Appeal Board )
T-91-97
Campbell J.
7/11/97
12 pp.
Application for judicial review of decisions of review bodies concerned with veterans pensions dismissing applications for veterans pension benefits on basis allegedly had contracted hepatitis, resulting in tuberculosis, while on duty in Sardinia in 1968-Entitlement Board and Appeal Panel of Veterans Review and Appeal Board found that applicant had contracted hepatitis in off duty activity (eating mussels at local, off-base restaurant) and that hepatitis short-term affliction not causing disability-Application allowed-In Canadian Pension Commission decision, no finding of fact as to circumstances in which disease contracted-Before Entitlement Board, former Canadian Forces pilot gave evidence hepatitis common occurrence in Sardinia among Canadian Forces personnel, attributed to eating bad mussels, to point where pilots on all squadrons deployed to Sardinia advised to avoid sea food there-Evidence before Appeal Panel not conclusive on where applicant might have eaten contaminated sea food, as applicant stated in affidavit ate mussels at base mess as well as in local restaurant-In view of conflict between new evidence before Appeal Panel and conclusion reached by Entitlement Board, latter Board's decision should have been given no weight by Appeal Panel as had obligation to conduct trial de novo-Appeal Panel also disregarded Brigadier General's evidence Canadian Forces pilots in Sardinia on duty 24 hours a day and had full authorization to proceed into local economy for meals and recreation, under full understanding and knowledge were protected by rules and regulations of RCAF-Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, s. 39 providing Appeal Panel obliged to accept any uncontradicted evidence presented to it by applicant or appellant that it considers credible in circumstances-Appeal Panel wrong in effectively finding Brigadier General's evidence lacked credibility-Effect found by Appeal Panel cannot be supported by evidence-In view of serious errors made by Appeal Panel, its decision patently unreasonable and thus its decision reviewable-Panel's order quashed-Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, S.C. 1995, c. 18.