PENSIONS |
Canada (Minister of Human Resources and Development) v. Reisinger Estate
T-1203-03
2004 FC 893, Kelen J.
23/6/04
11 pp.
Judicial review of Canada Pension Plan-Old Age Security Review Tribunal's decision payments of guaranteed income supplement benefit (GIS benefit) should be made to respondent even though failed to submit application within one-year post-mortem deadline--Mr. Reisinger died in September 2000--Application for old age security (OAS) pension submitted on behalf of estate May 14, 2001--On July 10, Human Resources and Development Canada (HRDC) requested reasons why deceased had not applied for OAS pension himself and for additional documentation--Also forwarded two applications for GIS benefit, with request application be returned within 90 days, i.e. by October 8-- Completed application, additional documentation required not filed until January 28, 2002--March 4, 2002 letter indicated HRDC yet to receive requested documents, information, and if no response within 60 days would assume respondent no longer wished to apply for benefit--On April 24, HRDC approved OAS application, but denied application for GIS benefit because received outside one-year deadline--Minister declined to exercise Old Age Security Act, s. 32 discretion to deem GIS application received within statutory deadline due to administration error or erroneous advice--Review Tribunal found administrative error because as late as March 4, 2002 HRDC seeking response to request for additional information even though missing documentation sent January 28, 2002--Concluded initial 90-day notice, further 60-day notice amounted to waiver by HRDC of statutory limitation period-- Record indicating Minister declined to apply s. 32 discretion because failure to submit GIS benefit application on time led to denial of benefit, not administrative error--Reviewing Court limited to ensuring discretion conferred on Minister by statute not applied in unreasonable or contrary to law manner; Court cannot exercise discretion in Minister's place--No merit to argument Minister estopped from objecting to Review Tribunal's jurisdiction since entitled to object to exercise of jurisdiction contrary to law--Minister's conduct not abuse of process--90- and 60-day extensions intended to allow applicant to complete processing of OAS application--GIS benefit application not submitted within statutorily allowed deadline, and no provision for extension--Court could not review Minister's decision not to exercise discretion under s. 32 as application for judicial review not made within 30 days of decision--Old Age Security Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. O-9, s. 32.