# 2015-019 Releases

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–06–16

During the grievor's basic military qualification course, she suffered an episode of loss of consciousness. She was returned to full duty two weeks later and completed the course. Her medical file was reassessed several months later and it was determined the she had experienced an epileptic seizure and likely suffered from a medical condition that was not compliant with the Universality of Service principle. It was also determined that the condition was pre-existing but had not been disclosed. The grievor was released from the Canadian Forces under item 5(e) - irregular enrolment.

The grievor argued that item 5(e) cannot be the appropriate release item because the condition was not determined within ninety days of her enrolment and she was never diagnosed with the medical condition prior to her enrolment, thus the conclusion that the condition was pre-existing is speculative.

The IA concluded that the grievor knew she had the pre-existing medical condition based on incidents from her childhood that she recollected when her file was reassessed. The IA also contended that the seizure happened within two weeks of her enrolment, which qualified the grievor for a release under item 5(e).

The Committee considered that there was no formal diagnosis of a pre-existing medical condition. The medical documentation related to the incidents that occurred in her childhood do not even considers the possibility of such a condition. Thus, the Committee highlighted the fact that the grievor could not have disclosed information regarding a pre-existing condition that was not known or diagnosed prior to her enrolment. The Committee also noted that the conclusions of the specialist in that regard were more a statement of impressions made 10 years after the fact rather than a definitive diagnosis.The Committee also noted that the grievor was returned to full duty without any medical employment limitations two weeks after the incident occurred and successfully completed her basic training. She was only assigned medical employment limitations several months after the incident. Finally, the Committee noted that it took more than three years after the specialist's assessment to arrive at a release decision, which is inconsistent with other examples of an irregular enrolment where the release would occur shortly after the information is first discovered.

For these reasons, the Committee recommended that the Chief of the Defence change the release item from 5(e) to 3(b) – medical.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–10–23

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievor's release item be changed from 5(e) to 3 (b).