The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

Preamble

A non oral file review was held on February 17, 2003, at the request of the claimant.

Issue

Whether or not the claim is eligible for compensation.

Decision

That the claim is not eligible for compensation.

Decision: Unanimous

Background

On June 1, 2002, the claimant filed an application with the Manitoba Compensation for Victims of Crime program for an incident that occurred in 1968 or 1969. The claimant indicated that she was sexually assaulted at the age of 6 or 7. The claimant advised that the delay in reporting was due to the fact that she had suppressed the memory of this incident.

She reported the incident to the RCMP in the community where the incident occurred, in July 2001. No charges were laid. A number of factors conspired against any chance of a successful prosecution, including the long period of time between the alleged incident and the reporting.

The claimant sought compensation pursuant to The Criminal Injuries Compensation Act (the Act). Her application was denied as the incident, for which she sought compensation, occurred prior to this Act coming into effect.

Upon reconsideration by the program director, the claim was not accepted for the same reason. She then filed an appeal to this Commission.

Reasons

The Act received royal assent July 16, 1970 and was proclaimed in force on November 30, 1970. Prior to that, there was no similar program in effect.

For this appeal to be successful, the Panel would have to determine that the crime and her injuries occurred at a time when this Act was in effect. We were not able to make that determination.

In coming to our decision, we conducted a thorough review of the claim file. And, we viewed the testimony of the claimant, submitted on a video tape recording.

In a letter to the Minister of Justice, the claimant suggested that the incident may well have occurred subsequent to the date of the Act coming into effect. She may have got the year wrong, due to her uncertain memory of the event. That would have placed her within the purview of the Act and the program. However, it has been determined that the family of the alleged perpetrator moved away from the community in question in 1969. So, we have to accept her original dates of 1968 or 1969 as being correct.

The Act is clear as to when the program would come into effect. Section 25 reads:

"This Act applies in respect of claims for compensation arising from injury or death occurring after this Act comes into force."

While we have considerable sympathy for the claimant, we are not able to grant her request for compensation under this program. There is no legislative authority for us to do so.

We note that, in her letter to the Minister, the claimant noted that the legislature had recently removed the limitation period for commencement of civil actions in cases of sexual assault. She queried whether it was fair to remove this limitation while maintaining a limitation on victims' compensation.

The problem for her claim is not with the limitation period. The Act does allow for the extension of the period in extenuating circumstances. The problem is that her injuries were incurred before the Act and the program even existed.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Panel Members

T. Sargeant, Presiding Officer
A. Finkel, Commissioner
M. Day, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, B. Miller

T. Sargeant - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)

Signed at Winnipeg this 19th day of February, 2003