logo
Hepatitis C - Class Actions Settlement
HomeSearchContact UsFrançaisPrivacy

Claimants:
Essential Information
Claimants:
Additional Information
Claimants:
Loss of Income / Loss of Support / Loss of Services
Periodic Re-Assessment by the Courts
Appeals
Documents
Forms
Contacts and Links
Annual Reports
Administrator


Appeals : Arbitrator Decisions : #162 - October 14, 2004

D E C I S I O N

Background:

1. The Claimant submitted an application for compensation as a Primarily Infected Person under the Transfused HCV Plan (“the Plan"), as set out under the terms of the 1986-1990 Hepatitis C Settlement Agreement (“the Settlement Agreement").

2. By letter dated February 27, 2004, the Administrator denied his claim on the basis that the Claimant had not provide sufficient evidence to support his claim that he received blood during the period from January 1, 1986 - July 1, 1990 ("the Class Period").

3. The Claimant requested that an Arbitrator review the decision of the Administrator in an in-person hearing.

Evidence:

4. The Claimant testified that he has never, to his knowledge received a blood transfusion. Rather, he believes he was infected as a result of surgery in a contaminated operating theatre.

Analysis:

5. In order to qualify for compensation under the terms of the Transfused HCV Plan, the Claimant must satisfy the criteria set out in that Plan.

6. Article 3.01 of the Transfused HCV Plan provides that a person claiming to be a Primarily Infected Person must provide the Administrator with, amongst other things, "records demonstrating that the Claimant received a blood transfusion in Canada during the Class Period." As indicated above, the Settlement Agreement establishes the "Class Period" to be the period from and including, January 1, 1986 to and including July 1, 1990.

7. No records demonstrating that the Claimant received a blood transfusion in Canada during the Class Period were produced. Rather, the Claimant's evidence is that he has never had a blood transfusion.

8. Neither the Administrator, nor I, as an Arbitrator, have discretion to grant compensation to individuals infected with Hepatitis C who cannot show they received a transfusion within the time lines of the Class Period.

9. Accordingly, I find the Administrator correctly determined that the Claimant is not entitled to compensation pursuant to the Hepatitis C 1986-1990 Class Action Settlement, as he has not demonstrated that he received a blood transfusion during the Class Period.

Determination:

10. The decision of the Administrator to deny the Claimant compensation pursuant to the Hepatitis C 1986-1990 Class Action Settlement is upheld.

DATED AT TORONTO, THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2004.

________________________
Tanja Wacyk, Arbitrator


 

Disclaimer