Guy Savoie

The applicant requested that the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board initiate a reconsideration of a decision dismissing his application.

The application had been dismissed after the applicant failed to attend his scheduled electronic hearing and explicitly advised the Board that he wished to have the matter dismissed.

The applicant claimed he was unaware of the consequences of his decision.

The Board declined to initiate a reconsideration, finding that the applicant had been fully informed of the consequences of dismissal and that no factors outweighed the public interest in the finality of the Board's decisions.

The Applicant requested a reconsideration of a decision that dismissed his application as abandoned for failing to appear at a scheduled hearing.

The Applicant submitted that he did not receive the notice of hearing because he had been transferred to a different correctional facility.

The adjudicator found that the Applicant did not receive notice through no fault of his own and initiated a reconsideration in the interest of procedural fairness, ordering a fresh hearing.

The Applicant sought reconsideration of a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board decision that denied his claim for loss of income following the death of his son.

The Applicant had been unable to obtain the required Employer's Report prior to the initial written hearing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Board initiated a reconsideration, finding that the new evidence could not have been reasonably obtained earlier and was determinative.

Upon reviewing the Employer's Report and therapy records, the Board awarded the Applicant $7,750.00 for income loss, bringing the total compensation award to $16,750.00.

The Applicant requested a reconsideration of a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board decision that denied funeral expenses for her son due to a lack of supporting documentation.

The Board found that the Applicant had in fact submitted the receipts, but they were omitted from the electronic file due to an administrative oversight.

The Board initiated a reconsideration, found the funeral expenses to be reasonable, and awarded $7,644.10 after deducting amounts already received from the Financial Assistance for Families of Homicide Victims program.

The Applicant requested a reconsideration of a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board decision because a request for legal fees was not provided to the adjudicator due to an administrative oversight.

The Board initiated the reconsideration, finding that the oversight conflicted with Board procedure and outweighed the public interest in the finality of decisions.

The Board awarded $400.00 for legal fees.

The applicant sought compensation for bereavement counselling following the death of their brother, who was stabbed and killed.

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board had previously awarded $750 for bereavement counselling, which remained unutilized.

The Board found the deceased was a victim of a crime of violence but concluded the previous award was reasonable and appropriate.

The application was closed with no further compensation awarded.

The Applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for a periodic award to support the child of the deceased, who was killed in a shooting.

The Board found that the deceased was a victim of a crime of violence but denied compensation under s. 17(1) of the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act because the deceased initiated the shooting, directly contributing to his own death.

Furthermore, the Applicant failed to prove that the deceased was financially supporting the child at the time of the incident.

The Applicant requested a reconsideration of a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board decision that denied her claim for her caregiver spouse's loss of income.

The Board initiated the reconsideration because the Applicant had submitted the required Employer's Report prior to the original written hearing, but it was not provided to the adjudicator due to an administrative oversight.

Upon reviewing the new evidence, the Board awarded $600 for the caregiver's loss of income, bringing the total compensation award to $5,600.

The applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for pain and suffering compensation after her two sons were stabbed by unknown offenders.

Although the applicant did not witness the assault, she experienced significant distress, anxiety, and depression upon seeing her sons in critical condition at the hospital.

The Board applied the legal test for mental nervous shock and found that the applicant's emotional harm, while genuine, did not rise to the level of a serious and prolonged recognized psychiatric illness.

The application was dismissed.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained during a stabbing.

The Board found that the Applicant was a victim of a crime of violence.

However, the Board reduced the compensation award because the Applicant deliberately misled police about the location of the incident, thereby failing to reasonably cooperate with law enforcement.

The Board awarded $2,000 for pain and suffering and $400 for legal costs.

The Applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for compensation after sustaining life-threatening stab wounds during an altercation.

The Board found that the Applicant was a victim of a crime of violence.

However, because the Applicant deliberately misled police about the location of the incident, frustrating their investigation, the Board reduced the compensation award under section 17(2) of the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act.

The Applicant was awarded $4,000 for pain and suffering, plus $400 for legal costs.

The applicant sought a review of a previous Criminal Injuries Compensation Board order that awarded monthly periodic payments for medical marijuana.

The applicant requested to cancel the periodic award in exchange for a lump sum payment of $5,000 for pain and suffering.

Based on new medical evidence indicating the applicant's chronic pain is permanent, the Board found a change in circumstances justifying the variation.

The Board cancelled the periodic payments and awarded the requested $5,000 lump sum, bringing the applicant to the maximum amount payable for a single incident.

The applicant requested a reconsideration of an Order of Dismissal issued by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

The applicant relied on new evidence under Rule 19.3(a).

The Board denied the request, finding that the new submissions did not provide the necessary clarity or missing details required to assess the claim.

The original Order of Dismissal was confirmed.

The applicant requested a review of a single member's decision to cease her $1,000 monthly periodic payments from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board upon her turning 65 years old.

The review panel found that automatically ceasing payments at age 65 without a detailed analysis of the applicant's actual financial circumstances constituted an error of law.

The panel reviewed the applicant's medical and financial records, noting her income amount remained unchanged despite transitioning to Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan benefits.

The panel reinstated the periodic payments and awarded retroactive compensation.

The applicant requested a review of a single member's decision reducing her periodic compensation payments from $1,000 to $400 per month.

The applicant argued that not all medical expenses and loss of income were considered.

The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board found no serious error of law or unreasonable exercise of discretion, as the applicant failed to provide receipts for the additional claimed expenses and had already received the maximum allowable periodic award for the previous year.

However, because the applicant was not given timely notice of the reduction, the Board awarded an additional $1,200 to cover the shortfall for two months.

The Applicant sought financial compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries allegedly sustained during a robbery and assault.

The Board found significant inconsistencies in the Applicant's evidence and noted a lack of medical documentation to support the claim of a broken jaw.

Furthermore, the Applicant failed to promptly report the incident to police and did not cooperate with the investigation.

The Board concluded the Applicant failed to prove he was a victim of a crime of violence and exercised its discretion to deny compensation.

The applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained when he was shot in the leg during a drug transaction.

The Board found that the applicant was a victim of a crime of violence.

However, the Board reduced the compensation awarded to $2,000 for pain and suffering, finding that the applicant's involvement in the drug trade indirectly contributed to his injuries and that he failed to reasonably cooperate with the police investigation.

The Applicant sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained when an employee threw a knife at her, penetrating her chest.

Although the Applicant claimed the incident was an accident and the alleged offender was acquitted of criminal charges, the Board found on a balance of probabilities that the injuries resulted from a crime of violence.

The Board awarded the Applicant $16,595.50 for pain and suffering, medical expenses, future counselling, and loss of income.