Is a plaintiff's sexual assault conviction a "collateral attack" on the criminal conviction itself?

As Arbour J. noted, in Toronto v. C.U.P.E. the challenge was not to the propriety of the criminal conviction. At para. 34 she said as follows: … [I]n the case at bar, the union does not seek to overturn the sexual abuse conviction itself, but simply contest, for the purposes of a different claim with different legal consequences, whether the conviction was correct. It is an implicit attack on the correctness of the factual basis of the decision, not a contest about whether that decision has legal force, as clearly it does. Prohibited "collateral attacks" are abuses of the court's process.