Íæż½ã½ã

The Applicant does not deny that her claim for compensation regarding two claims under Appendix D to the Staff Rules was time-barred. Rather, she submits that the record shows that the delay incurred by her in submitting a claim to the ABCC was the result of her being unable to obtain clear advice from HRMS regarding the process to follow with regard to submitting a claim to the ABCC. The ABCC decision is partially rescinded and the Applicant’s request for the reimbursement of the Ayurveda treatment is remanded to the ABCC for a fair and full consideration. The Tribunal included observations regarding the need for the organization to maintain up to date rule, regulations and bulletin as it should lead by example in establishing a safe and healthy working environment. The ABCC correctly determined that the circumstances presented by the Applicant could not result in a waiver of the deadline for requesting the reimbursement of the costs for the June 2008 plane ticket and therefore correctly rejected this part of the Applicant’s request. With regard to her second claim, the established deadline should be calculated from the date of the new diagnosis or from the date on which the costs of the new treatment become effectively known by the staff member. Otherwise, a staff member’s right to claim all the costs related to his or her illness will remain illusory and without substance. The Tribunal also considers that it would be absurd and unreasonable to expect a staff member to formulate a compensation claim within four months from the onset of the illness for possible future costs related to his or her illness which are unknown at the time.