Appeals : Confirmed Referee Decisions : #14 - July 24th, 2001

D E C I S I O N

1. The Claimant applied for compensation as a primarily-Infected person pursuant to the Transfused HCV Plan.

2. By letter dated March 19, 2001, the Administrator denied his claim because he did not provide sufficient evidence that he received a blood transfusion in Canada between January 1, 1986 and July 1, 1990.

3. The Claimant requested that the Administrator's denial of his claim be reviewed by an Arbitrator.

4. At the outset of the hearing, the claimant sought clarification as to my status as an Arbitrator or Referee, indicating that he had been confused with respect to that issue. Following clarification of the rights that would flow to him by way of a potential appeal, depending on whether my status was that of a Referee or an Arbitrator, and following counsel for the Administrator's indication that the Administrator had no difficulty if the Claimant changed his selection from my sitting as an Arbitrator to sitting as a Referee, the Claimant and the Administrator agreed that I would sit in the capacity of Referee.

5. The Claimant indicated that at the time of his application as a primarily infected person under the HCV Transfused Plan, he believed that he had received a blood transfusion on 11/12/87 at the Oshawa General Hospital. Following the issuance of the Administrator's decision in this matter, and the filing by the Claimant of his request for review of that decision, the Claimant was able to verify with his physician at the time of the operation that he did not receive a blood transfusion during the operation in question, nor did he have a transfusion during any of the relevant periods that would entitle him to compensation pursuant to the Plan.

6. Accordingly, the Claimant recognized at the hearing that the circumstances of his case fell outside of the rules provided for compensation. The Claimant urged that all persons in his circumstances should be eligible for compensation, while at the same time indicating that he understood that under the provisions of the Plan, as it stood, he was not eligible for such compensation.

7. Given the Claimant's present understanding that he did not receive a blood transfusion, and his understanding that he is not eligible for compensation, there is no basis to interfere with the Administrator's decision in this matter.

DATED at Toronto this 24th day of July, 2001

_____________________________________
C. Michael Mitchell
Referee