Other Canada Pension Plan (CPP)

Decision

[1] The appeal is dismissed.

[2] The Appellant, B. S., isn’t eligible for a Canada Pension Plan (CPP) survivor pension. This decision explains why I am dismissing the appeal.

Overview

[3] The Appellant and the deceased contributor were married in Bangladesh in 1991. They came to Canada in 1996. They were separated in 2014. The deceased contributor died on May 2, 2021.^{Footnote 1}

[4] The Appellant applied for a survivor pension on December 31, 2021. The Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister) refused her application. The Appellant appealed the Minister’s decision to the Social Security Tribunal’s General Division.

[5] The Appellant says that she was legally married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death. They were separated, but they never got divorced. She is entitled to a survivor pension. 

[6] The Minister says that the Appellant isn’t entitled to a survivor pension. The Appellant and the deceased contributor were divorced in 2016. A court order proves this. Therefore, the Appellant wasn’t married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death. 

[7] I agree with the Minister.

What the Appellant must prove

[8] For the Appellant to succeed, she must prove that she meets the definition of a “survivor” under the CPP.^{Footnote 2}

[9] A “survivor” in relation to a deceased contributor means (1) a person who was the common-law partner of the contributor at the time of the contributor’s death, or (2) if there was no common-law partner, a person who was married to the contributor at the time of the contributor’s death. There can be a separation, but the marriage must not have been dissolved by a divorce.

Matters I have to consider first

The Appellant wasn’t at the hearing

[10] A hearing can go ahead without the Appellant if she got the notice of hearing.^{Footnote 3} I decided that the Appellant got the notice of hearing because on February 23, 2024, it was mailed to the address she provided to the Tribunal.^{Footnote 4} Section 22 of the Social Security Tribunal Rules of Procedure (Rules) says that documents sent by the Tribunal are considered received 10 days after the day they are sent. Reminder telephone calls were made by Tribunal staff to the Appellant prior to the hearing that went straight to voicemail. However, she identified herself in the voicemail message. Detailed messages were left advising her of the hearing.

[11] An appellant has an obligation to keep their contact information up to date. Section 13(2) of the Tribunal’s Rules says that parties must notify the Tribunal as soon as possible of any changes to their contact information. Section 9(1) of the Rules says that the Tribunal uses the contact information it has on file when it contacts a party or sends a document to a party. Section 9(2) of the Rules says that if the Tribunal can’t reach a party using the contact information the party gave, the Tribunal can continue the appeal process even if they can’t reach that party.

[12] So, the hearing took place when it was scheduled, but without the Appellant.

Reasons for my decision

[13] I find that the Appellant hasn’t proven that she was a “survivor” under the CPP. I accept the documentary evidence that shows a divorce between her and the deceased contributor in 2016. Therefore, she wasn’t married to the contributor at the time of his death on May 2, 2021.

Was the Appellant married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death?

[14] The Appellant wasn’t married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death. A Final Order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia dated August 11, 2016, establishes that there was a divorce that ended the marriage before his death.^{Footnote 5}

What the Appellant says

[15] The Appellant says that she was legally married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death.^{Footnote 6} They were married in Dhaka, Bangladesh, on June 6, 1991.^{Footnote 7} They came to Canada in 1996.^{Footnote 8} They were separated in 2014, but never got divorced.^{Footnote 9} She “never signed any paper and never went to the court”.^{Footnote 10} She says that the divorce is a lie and a fraud.^{Footnote 11}

The court order proves a divorce prior to the deceased contributor’s death

[16] The Minister filed a Final Order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia dated August 11, 2016, which appears to be a certified true copy.^{Footnote 12} The order says that the Appellant and deceased contributor, who were married in Dhaka, Bangladesh, on June 6, 1991, are divorce from each other, the divorce to take effect on the 31st day after the date of the order.

[17] I accept based on the evidence of the court order that the Appellant wasn’t married to the deceased contributor at the time of his death on May 2, 2021. While the Appellant may not accept that there was a divorce, I have no basis to question the court order that the Minister filed in this appeal.

Conclusion

[18] I find that the Appellant isn’t eligible for a survivor pension because she hasn’t proven that she meets the definition of a “survivor” under the CPP.

[19] This means the appeal is dismissed.