Fournier v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court headnote
Fournier v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-01-17 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 19 File numbers A-209-05 Decision Content Date: 20060117 Docket: A-209-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 19 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. BETWEEN: RHODENA FOURNIER Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NADON J.A. Date: 20060117 Docket: A-209-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 19 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. BETWEEN: RHODENA FOURNIER Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006) [1] For substantially the reasons given by Mosley J., we have not been persuaded that in concluding that the appellant's disability did not arise out of nor was it directly connected with her military service, the Board made no error which would allow us to intervene. [2] We are also of the same view with respect to the appellant's arguments based on paragraph 21(3)(f) of the Pension Act. [3] The appeal will therefore be dismissed with costs. "M. Nadon" J.A. …
Read full judgment
Fournier v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-01-17 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 19 File numbers A-209-05 Decision Content Date: 20060117 Docket: A-209-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 19 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. BETWEEN: RHODENA FOURNIER Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NADON J.A. Date: 20060117 Docket: A-209-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 19 CORAM: NADON J.A. SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. BETWEEN: RHODENA FOURNIER Appellant and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on January 17, 2006) [1] For substantially the reasons given by Mosley J., we have not been persuaded that in concluding that the appellant's disability did not arise out of nor was it directly connected with her military service, the Board made no error which would allow us to intervene. [2] We are also of the same view with respect to the appellant's arguments based on paragraph 21(3)(f) of the Pension Act. [3] The appeal will therefore be dismissed with costs. "M. Nadon" J.A.
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca