Other Canada Pension Plan (CPP)

Decision

[1] The appeal is allowed.

[2] The Claimant, L. M., is entitled to a Canada Pension Plan (CPP) orphan’s benefit from October 2018 to April 2019. This decision explains why I am allowing the appeal.

Overview

[3] The Claimant’s father died in 2008. As a result, she received an orphan’s benefit from the Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister).^{Footnote 1}

[4] The Claimant turned 18 in July 2014. This meant she could receive an orphan’s benefit only if she was in school or university full-time.^{Footnote 2}

[5] The Claimant was in a car accident in November 2012. As a result, she has post‑traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other mental health issues. She also has weekly medical appointments to treat her injuries. These medical appointments make it hard for her to go to school in person, so she takes correspondence courses.

[6] In the fall of 2018, the Claimant enrolled in one correspondence course at the X. The X lets students take only one correspondence course at a time.^{Footnote 3}

[7] In May 2019, the Claimant changed schools. Since then, she has been enrolled in two or three correspondence courses that take up about 20 hours per week.

[8] The Minister stopped paying the orphan’s benefit to the Claimant from October 2018 to April 2019. The Minister says the Claimant wasn’t in school full-time during this period.

[9] The Claimant appealed to the Tribunal’s General Division. She says she has met the requirements under the Canada Pension Plan to receive an orphan’s benefit.

What the Claimant has to prove

[10] For the Claimant to succeed, she has to prove she was in school full-time from October 2018 to April 2019.

Reasons for my decision

[11] I find that the Claimant was entitled to an orphan’s benefit from October 2018 to April 2019. I reached this decision by considering the following issues:

• What are the rules for full-time attendance at school?
• Was the Claimant a full-time student at the beginning of the 2018–2019 academic year?
• Was the Claimant absent during the 2018–2019 academic year because of her illness?
• If so, was the Claimant still a full-time student under the Canada Pension Plan?

The rules for full-time attendance at school

[12] A claimant who is between the ages of 18 and 25 can receive an orphan’s benefit only if they are “in full-time attendance at a school or university.”^{Footnote 4}

[13] The Canada Pension Plan doesn’t say what “full-time attendance” means. But, to receive an orphan’s benefit, a claimant has to send the Minister a declaration signed by their school to prove they are enrolled as a full-time student.^{Footnote 5}

[14] But, in some cases, a school’s definition of full-time attendance can be ignored.^{Footnote 6} The CPP provides social benefits, so I have to interpret the law that governs it broadly and generously. If I have any doubts about the wording of the law, I have to interpret it in the Claimant’s favour.^{Footnote 7}

[15] Full-time course loads are designed for students who don’t have health issues. A claimant who is ill might never be able to go to school full-time, according to their school’s definition. I don’t think the Government of Canada meant to discriminate against claimants who are ill. So, interpreted generously, what is full-time for one student might not be full-time for another. I think a claimant is a full-time student if they are spending as much time on their schooling as their illness allows.

[16] Even with a generous definition of “full-time,” there are still times when a claimant can’t go to school. The Canada Pension Plan Regulations (Regulations) say that a claimant who is absent or can’t go to school full-time because they are ill can still be considered a full-time student and receive an orphan’s benefit. To still be considered a full-time student, the Claimant has to meet these requirements:^{Footnote 8}

• She was in school full-time at the beginning of an academic year.
• She became absent or could not go back to school full-time because of her illness.
• Right after her illness, she went back to school full-time in the same academic year.
• If she could not go back to school full-time in the same academic year, she went back to school full-time in the “next ensuing academic year”—that is, the academic year right after the one in which she became absent.

[17] The Regulations don’t say what “academic year” means. In Canada, the academic year usually runs from September to May.

[18] The Regulations say the academic year includes the normal vacation periods.^{Footnote 9} So, including the summer vacation period, the academic year would run from September to August.

[19] Based on a generous interpretation of “academic year,” a claimant who starts a course at any time in the fall is a full-time student at the beginning of an academic year.

The Claimant was a full-time student

[20] The Claimant was a full-time student at the beginning of the 2018–2019 academic year.

[21] In October 2018, the Claimant was enrolled in one correspondence course at the X. This meant she wasn’t a full-time student according to her school’s declaration.^{Footnote 10}

[22] But I find that she was a full-time student because she was taking as many courses as her illness allowed.

[23] At the hearing, the Claimant answered my questions spontaneously and in a straightforward way. She said that, since 2012, she has struggled with school because of her health issues and her medical appointments. If she didn’t finish a course any time after November 2012, it was because of her illness.

[24] I accept her evidence about this.

[25] Illness certificates from the Claimant’s family doctors support what the Claimant says about her illness. The certificates say that the Claimant could not go to school from November 2012 to March 2019 (later extended to February 2020) because of “ongoing risk issues/PTSD/mental stressors.”^{Footnote 11}

[26] The certificates don’t say that the Claimant could not go to school at all. They say that her illness was likely to interrupt her schooling at times.

[27] Because of her school’s policy, the Claimant could take only one correspondence course at a time. She had to take correspondence courses because of her illness. So her illness was the reason she could take only one course at a time.

[28] This means that being enrolled in one correspondence course in the fall of 2018 made the Claimant a full-time student at the beginning of the 2018–2019 academic year.

The Claimant was absent because of her illness

[29] The Claimant became absent during the 2018–2019 academic year because of her illness.

[30] The Minister decided that the Claimant wasn’t a full-time student at the beginning of the 2018–2019 academic year. This meant it didn’t need to decide whether she then became absent.

[31] The Claimant’s school said she didn’t complete her course.^{Footnote 12} She didn’t submit any assignments after December 2018.^{Footnote 13}

[32] By not submitting her assignments, the Claimant became absent during the 2018–2019 academic year. Based on the evidence above, I find that she became absent because of her illness.

The Claimant was still a full-time student under the Canada Pension Plan

[33] Even though she became absent during the 2018–2019 academic year, the Claimant is still considered to have been in school full-time from October 2018 to April 2019 under the Canada Pension Plan. This is because she meets the requirements set out in the Regulations.^{Footnote 14}

[34] The first requirement is that you are in school full-time at the beginning of an academic year. The Claimant was in school full-time at the beginning of the 2018–2019 academic year.

[35] The second requirement is that you became absent or could not go back to school full‑time because of your illness. The Claimant became absent during the 2018–2019 academic year because of her illness.

[36] The third requirement is that you go back to school full-time in the same academic year. In May 2019, the Claimant enrolled in a correspondence course at a new school. Since then, she has been in school about 20 hours per week. I find that this course load is all the Claimant can manage because of her illness.

[37] This makes her a full-time student.^{Footnote 15}

Conclusion

[38] I find that the Claimant is entitled to an orphan’s benefit from October 2018 to April 2019.

[39] This means that the appeal is allowed.