Date: 20060213
Docket: T-879-05
Citation: 2006 FC 152
BETWEEN:
MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
Applicant
- and -
THE ESTATE OF MILDRED DUBLIN
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
PINARD J.:
[1] Although it was duly notified, the respondent has not submitted any arguments and was not represented at the hearing of this application for judicial review.
[2] The impugned decision is that made by the Review Tribunal-Canada Pension Plan/Old Age Security (the "Review Tribunal"), dated April 21, 2005, ordering the Minister to make an ex gratia payment equal to the amount the Estate of Mildred Dublin (the "respondent") would have otherwise been entitled to receive as Old Age Security Benefits had the application been made within one year of Mrs. Dublin's death.
[3] The question at issue is whether the Review Tribunal, in doing so, exceeded its jurisdiction.
[4] The relevant provisions of the Old Age Security Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. O-9 (the "OAS Act") are as follows:
2. [. . .]
"benefit" means a pension, supplement or allowance;
27.1 (1) A person who is dissatisfied with a decision or determination made under this Act that no benefit may be paid to that person, or respecting the amount of any benefit that may be paid to that person, may, within ninety days after the day on which the person is notified in the prescribed manner of the decision or determination, or within such longer period as the Minister may either before or after the expiration of those ninety days allow, make a request to the Minister in the prescribed form and manner for a reconsideration of that decision or determination.
(2) The Minister shall, without delay after receiving a request referred to in subsection (1), reconsider the decision or determination, as the case may be, and may confirm or vary it and may approve payment of a benefit, determine the amount of a benefit or determine that no benefit is payable and shall without delay notify the person who made the request in writing of the Minister's decision and of the reasons for the decision.
2. [. . .]
« prestation » Pension, supplément ou allocation.
27.1 (1) La personne qui se croit lésée par une décision de refus ou de liquidation de la prestation prise en application de la présente loi peut, dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant la notification de la décision, selon les modalités réglementaires, ou dans le délai plus long que le ministre peut accorder avant ou après l'expiration du délai de quatre-vingt-dix jours, demander au ministre, selon les modalités réglementaires, de réviser sa décision.
(2) Le ministre étudie les demandes dès leur réception; il peut confirmer ou modifier sa décision soit en agréant le versement de la prestation ou en la liquidant, soit en décidant qu'il n'y a pas lieu de verser la prestation. Sans délai, il notifie sa décision et ses motifs.
28. (1) A person who makes a request under subsection 27.1(1) and who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Minister in respect of the request, or, subject to the regulations, any person on their behalf, may appeal the decision to a Review Tribunal established under subsection 82(1) of the Canada Pension Plan.
(2) Where, on an appeal to a Review Tribunal, it is a ground of the appeal that the decision made by the Minister as to the income or income from a particular source or sources of an applicant or beneficiary or of the spouse or common-law partner of the applicant or beneficiary was incorrectly made, the appeal on that ground shall, in accordance with the regulations, be referred for decision to the Tax Court of Canada, whose decision, subject only to variation by that Court in accordance with any decision on an appeal under the Tax Court of Canada Act relevant to the appeal to the Review Tribunal, is final and binding for all purposes of the appeal to the Review Tribunal except in accordance with the Federal Courts Act.
28. (1) L'auteur de la demande prévue au paragraphe 27.1(1) qui se croit lésé par la décision révisée du ministre -- ou, sous réserve des règlements, quiconque pour son compte -- peut appeler de la décision devant un tribunal de révision constitué en application du paragraphe 82(1) du Régime de pensions du Canada.
(2) Lorsque l'appelant prétend que la décision du ministre touchant son revenu ou celui de son époux ou conjoint de fait, ou le revenu tiré d'une ou de plusieurs sources particulières, est mal fondée, l'appel est, conformément aux règlements, renvoyé pour décision devant la Cour canadienne de l'impôt. La décision de la Cour est, sous la seule réserve des modifications que celle-ci pourrait y apporter pour l'harmoniser avec une autre décision rendue aux termes de la Loi sur la Cour canadienne de l'impôt sur un appel pertinent à celui interjeté aux termes de la présente loi devant un tribunal de révision, définitive et obligatoire et ne peut faire l'objet que d'un recours prévu par la Loi sur les Cours fédérales.
29. (1) Notwithstanding anything in this Act but subject to subsection (4), an application for a benefit that would have been payable to a deceased person who, prior to his death, would have been entitled, on approval of an application, to payment of that benefit under this Act may be made within one year after the person's death by the estate, the representative or heir of that person or by such person as may be prescribed by regulation.
(2) Where an application is made pursuant to subsection (1), a benefit that would have been payable to a deceased person referred to in that subsection shall be paid to the estate or to such person as may be prescribed by regulation.
(3) Any application made pursuant to subsection (1) is deemed to have been received on the date of the death of a person who, prior to his death, would have been entitled, on approval of an application, to payment of a benefit under this Act.
29. (1) Par dérogation à la présente loi mais sous réserve du paragraphe (4), les personnes désignées par règlement, les ayants cause, le représentant ou l'héritier d'une personne qui, avant son décès, aurait eu droit, une fois sa demande agréée, au versement des prestations visées par la présente loi peuvent demander celle-ci dans l'année qui suit le décès.
(2) Dans le cas visé au paragraphe (1), la prestation est versée aux ayants cause ou aux personnes désignées par règlement.
(3) La demande de prestation visée au paragraphe (1) est réputée avoir été reçue le jour du décès de la personne qui y aurait eu droit.
[5] The following paragraphs of the Canada Pension Plan, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-8 (the "CPP") are relevant:
82. (1) A party who is dissatisfied with a decision of the Minister made under section 81 or subsection 84(2), or a person who is dissatisfied with a decision of the Minister made under subsection 27.1(2) of the Old Age Security Act, or, subject to the regulations, any person on their behalf, may appeal the decision to a Review Tribunal in writing within 90 days, or any longer period that the Commissioner of Review Tribunals may, either before or after the expiration of those 90 days, allow, after the day on which the party was notified in the prescribed manner of the decision or the person was notified in writing of the Minister's decision and of the reasons for it.
[. . .]
(11) A Review Tribunal may confirm or vary a decision of the Minister made under section 81 or subsection 84(2) or under subsection 27.1(2) of the Old Age Security Act and may take any action in relation to any of those decisions that might have been taken by the Minister under that section or either of those subsections, and the Commissioner of Review Tribunals shall thereupon notify the Minister and the other parties to the appeal of the Review Tribunal's decision and of the reasons for its decision.
82. (1) La personne qui se croit lésée par une décision du ministre rendue en application de l'article 81 ou du paragraphe 84(2) ou celle qui se croit lésée par une décision du ministre rendue en application du paragraphe 27.1(2) de la Loi sur la sécurité de la vieillesse ou, sous réserve des règlements, quiconque de sa part, peut interjeter appel par écrit auprès d'un tribunal de révision de la décision du ministre soit dans les quatre-vingt-dix jours suivant le jour où la première personne est, de la manière prescrite, avisée de cette décision, ou, selon le cas, suivant le jour où le ministre notifie à la deuxième personne sa décision et ses motifs, soit dans le délai plus long autorisé par le commissaire des tribunaux de révision avant ou après l'expiration des quatre-vingt-dix jours.
[. . .]
(11) Un tribunal de révision peut confirmer ou modifier une décision du ministre prise en vertu de l'article 81 ou du paragraphe 84(2) ou en vertu du paragraphe 27.1(2) de la Loi sur la sécurité de la vieillesse et il peut, à cet égard, prendre toute mesure que le ministre aurait pu prendre en application de ces dispositions; le commissaire des tribunaux de révision doit aussitôt donner un avis écrit de la décision du tribunal et des motifs la justifiant au ministre ainsi qu'aux parties à l'appel.
84. (1) A Review Tribunal and the Pension Appeals Board have authority to determine any question of law or fact as to
(a) whether any benefit is payable to a person,
(b) the amount of any such benefit,
(c) whether any person is eligible for a division of unadjusted pensionable earnings,
(d) the amount of that division,
(e) whether any person is eligible for an assignment of a contributor's retirement pension, or
(f) the amount of that assignment,
and the decision of a Review Tribunal, except as provided in this Act, or the decision of the Pension Appeals Board, except for judicial review under the Federal Courts Act, as the case may be, is final and binding for all purposes of this Act.
(2) The Minister, a Review Tribunal or the Pension Appeals Board may, notwithstanding subsection (1), on new facts, rescind or amend a decision under this Act given by him, the Tribunal or the Board, as the case may be.
84. (1) Un tribunal de révision et la Commission d'appel des pensions ont autorité pour décider des questions de droit ou de fait concernant :
a) la question de savoir si une prestation est payable à une personne;
b) le montant de cette prestation;
c) la question de savoir si une personne est admissible à un partage des gains non ajustés ouvrant droit à pension;
d) le montant de ce partage;
e) la question de savoir si une personne est admissible à bénéficier de la cession de la pension de retraite d'un cotisant;
f) le montant de cette cession.
La décision du tribunal de révision, sauf disposition contraire de la présente loi, ou celle de la Commission d'appel des pensions, sauf contrôle judiciaire dont elle peut faire l'objet aux termes de la Loi sur les Cours fédérales, est définitive et obligatoire pour l'application de la présente loi.
(2) Indépendamment du paragraphe (1), le ministre, un tribunal de révision ou la Commission d'appel des pensions peut, en se fondant sur des faits nouveaux, annuler ou modifier une décision qu'il a lui-même rendue ou qu'elle a elle-même rendue conformément à la présente loi.
[6] The standard of review applicable to an excess of jurisdiction or an error of law by a Review Tribunal is correctness (Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Néron, 2004 FC 101; Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Reisinger Estate, 2004 FC 893; Canada (Attorney General) v. Comeau, 2004 FC 1034; Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Heaman, 2004 FC 1155; Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Dublin Estate, 2004 FC 1184; Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Ding, 2005 FC 76).
[7] Review Tribunals are created pursuant to section 82 of the CPP. They only have the powers provided under the CPP and the OAS Act. They do not have any equitable jurisdiction (Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Esler, 2004 FC 1567).
[8] Under subsection 82(11), a Review Tribunal may confirm or vary a decision of the Minister made under subsection 27.1(2) of the OAS Act and may take any action in relation to that decision that might have been taken by the Minister under that subsection.
[9] The action that may be taken by the Minister under subsection 27.1(2) is as follows: a Minister may confirm or vary the initial decision and may approve payment of a benefit, determine the amount of a benefit or determine that no benefit is payable.
[10] "Benefit" is defined under the OAS Act as "a pension, supplement or allowance" which are defined as payments authorized to be paid under Parts I, II, and III, respectively.
[11] It is clear that an ex gratia payment is none of the above. Such a payment is instead made pursuant to a Treasury Board policy (Byer v. Canada, 2002 FCT 518, Byer v. Canada, 2002 FCA 430, and Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Policy on Claims and Ex gratia Payments (Ottawa: June 1, 1998)).
[12] As it is clear that the application for benefits in this matter did not meet the requirements of the OAS Act because it was not made within one year of Mrs. Dublin's death pursuant to subsection 29(1) of the OAS Act, it is my opinion, therefore, that the Review Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in ordering the Minister to make an ex gratia payment, an action that was not within the Minister's jurisdiction under subsection 27.1(2).
[13] Consequently, the application for judicial review is allowed, the impugned decision is set aside and the matter is sent back to the Review Tribunal for reconsideration in accordance with these Reasons for Order.
JUDGE
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
February 13, 2006
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-879-05
STYLE OF CAUSE: MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT v. THE ESTATE OF MILDRED DUBLIN
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: January 11, 2006
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Pinard J.
DATED: February 13, 2006
APPEARANCES:
Florence Clancy FOR THE APPLICANT
No appearance FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
John H. Sims, Q.C. FOR THE APPLICANT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Donald Dublin FOR THE RESPONDENT
Victoria, British Columbia