# 2012-142 Releases, Administrative Review, Claims Against the Crown, Component Transfer (CT), Medical Employment Limitation (MEL), Release - Medical, Transfer from Regular Force to Reserve Force

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–02–25

Upon component transfer to the Primary Reserve Force, the grievor was wrongly advised that his medical employment limitations would require his medical release following a three-year period of retention.

Facing what he believed to be an imminent medical release, the grievor pursued and obtained civilian employment and terminated his Class B service with the Primary Reserve Force three months prior to the indicated release date. Six months later, the grievor was notified that he was still considered an “active, serving member” as an error had been detected and his release had not been appropriately staffed or approved. Eight months later, having invested considerable time and money to commence a new career, the grievor released voluntarily.

The grievor asserted that the administrative error at the time of his component transfer resulted in lost wages and promotion opportunities, the incurring of additional retraining expenses, and an extraordinary amount of stress being placed on him and his family. The grievor sought compensation for the above noted expenses and losses.

The Board determined that the Canadian Forces (CF) failed in its duty to correctly administer the grievor's release, and as a result the grievor suffered losses for which he should be compensated. The Board acknowledged that the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) has no authority to financially compensate the grievor for damages; that authority has been delegated to the Director Claims and Civil Litigation (DCCL). However, the Board found that the file should be sent to the DCCL with a full explanation of the relevant facts, including the undisputed fact that the CF committed a series of errors in administering the grievor's transfer and release.

The Board recommended that the grievance be denied, and that the CDS refer the file to DCCL with a request that DCCL negotiate a fair settlement with the grievor.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–04–22

The CDS agreed with the Committee that the CAF erred while administering the grievor's transfer from the Reg F to the P Res, and the Committee's recommendation that the grievance be denied. However, the CDS did not agree with the Commitee's recommendation that the grievor's file be referred to DCCL. Notwithstanding the errors in the transfer message, the grievor's transfer from the Reg F to the P Res was done at his request. The CDS considered that it was not a proper matter to DCCL as the grievor's file did not disclose evidence showing that he suffered damages consistent with the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act.