# 2019-104 Medical and Dental Care, Claims against the Crown, Medical condition

Case summary

F&R Date: 2020-05-28

The grievor alleged that she suffered a severe health issue as a result of unsafe exposure to a chemical substance while on her Basic Military Qualification training. As redress, she sought the convening of a Board of Inquiry (BOI) to review the circumstances leading to her medical condition.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Commander of the Canadian Defence Academy, denied the grievance stating that a BOI or Summary Investigation (SI) would be a duplication of the Occupational Health Review (OHR) that looked into the matter. The IA concluded that the use of the disputed chemical had previously been risk-assessed by Health Canada and that the OHR had not revealed any protocol breaches in her case.

The Committee found that, although the grievor's medical condition was not conclusively determined to have been caused by the chemical, her injury was sustained while on duty. The Committee also found that a Canadian Forces 98 form should have been completed at the time in accordance with Defence Administrative Order and Directive 5018-2.

The Committee reviewed the OHR and found that its investigation and report were unreliable and insufficient to support a fair and thorough examination of the grievor's allegations. In addition, the Committee noted that conducting an informal investigation like the OHR, was improper and contrary to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) policies that establish investigative requirements (SI or BOI) when a service member suffers a serious injury. The Committee found that the CAF had an obligation to formally investigate the grievor's injury and determined that, given the complex medical and scientific nature of the matter, a BOI should now be convened on an urgent basis. Finally, the Committee noted that any other remedy must stem from the subsequent findings of a BOI.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority afford the grievor redress by directing that a BOI be convened to investigate the grievor's allegation that her injury resulted from her military service.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that a BOI be conducted. Although the CDS determined that the grievor did not demonstrate on a balance of probabilities that exposure to permethrin caused her health issues, he agreed with the Committee that the incident was not documented and treated as per DAOD 5018-2 Report of Injuries and Exposure to Toxic Substances. The CDS agreed that not all questions were answered regarding this incident and as recommended by the Committee, directed that a BOI be conducted for an in-depth review of the treatments of uniforms with permethrin and whether the established procedures represent best practices. The CDS reiterated the list of questions prepared by the Committee to be answered during the BOI.