Julie Lassonde

The Applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for compensation following an assault by an acquaintance at a funeral service.

The offender pled guilty to assault causing bodily harm.

The Board found that the Applicant's physical and psychological injuries resulted from the crime of violence.

The Board awarded $2,000 for pain and suffering, $1,711.14 for medical and future physiotherapy expenses, and $400 for legal costs, for a total award of $4,111.14.

The Applicant requested a review of a Variation Decision that denied additional compensation for pain and suffering.

The Applicant argued the single member erred by stating he had not disclosed prior injuries.

The review panel found that while the member did err in failing to consider a medical report disclosing prior injuries, this did not constitute a serious error of law as it would not have changed the result.

The panel confirmed the Variation Decision regarding pain and suffering but exercised its discretion to allow the Applicant to use $2,400 in unused funds from a previous counselling award for massage therapy.

The Applicant had been receiving monthly periodic payments from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for loss of support since 1993, following the death of her husband as a result of a crime of violence.

The Board conducted a periodic review to assess the Applicant's ongoing need for support.

Finding that the Applicant's current anxiety was primarily related to her financial situation rather than the crime, and noting the total compensation already paid, the Board concluded that ongoing periodic payments were no longer reasonable.

The monthly payments were terminated.

The applicant, an inmate, sought compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for injuries sustained during an assault by two other inmates.

The Board found that the applicant was a victim of a crime of violence and that his behaviour did not contribute to his injuries, as he was acting in self-defence.

The Board awarded a total of $10,800 for pain and suffering, future therapy, and dental expenses.

The applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for bereavement counselling expenses following the death of her brother.

Her brother died in a fire set by an offender who was subsequently convicted of manslaughter.

The Board found that the manslaughter conviction was conclusive evidence of a crime of violence and that the applicant was eligible for compensation as a family member.

The Board awarded $1,800.00 for future bereavement counselling sessions.

The applicant sought to vary a previous Criminal Injuries Compensation Board award to include $190 for a recent follow-up dental examination related to injuries from a crime that occurred over 26 years ago.

The Board denied the request, finding that the applicant failed to provide proof of payment for the examination.

Furthermore, the Board noted that the applicant had already received a reasonable total award of over $11,000, and it was not appropriate to provide further compensation for future follow-up appointments.

The applicant applied to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for bereavement counselling for her four children following the shooting death of their father.

The Board required the applicant to provide evidence of paternity, which she subsequently submitted in the form of letters from the deceased's family members.

The Board found on a balance of probabilities that the deceased was a victim of a crime of violence and that the four children were his.

The Board awarded $1,200 for each child for future pre-authorized counselling expenses, totaling $4,800.

The applicant requested a review of a single member's decision denying her compensation for loss of income under the Compensation for Victims of Crime Act.

She argued the decision was made without considering her 2016 tax return, which she had not previously filed.

The review panel found that the newly provided 2016 tax return showed a higher net income than the year of her injury and the preceding years, confirming no loss of income occurred.

The panel concluded there was no serious error of law or unreasonable exercise of discretion and dismissed the request for review.

The Applicant and Alleged Offender brought pre-hearing motions before the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

The Applicant sought an order requiring the Alleged Offender to submit cross-examination questions in writing to prevent re-victimization, which the Board granted.

The Alleged Offender sought to admit late-filed documents and requested production of additional files, including the Applicant's counseling records.

The Board allowed the late-filed documents as relevant to credibility, but largely denied the production request, noting that counseling records are confidential and irrelevant to whether a crime of violence occurred.