On this page
Decision
[1] Leave to appeal to the Appeal Division of the Social Security Tribunal is refused.
Introduction
[2] The Applicant first applied for a Canada Pension Plan disability pension in 2007. The Respondent denied this claim, and appeals to the Office of the Commissioner of Review Tribunals and the Pension Appeals Board were dismissed.
[3] The Applicant again applied for a Canada Pension Plan disability pension in 2011 based on the same evidence. The Applicant’s Minimum Qualifying Period had changed since the 2007 application due to a legislative change. The Appellant claimed that she was disabled by fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, osteoporosis, migraines, sleep apnea, emphysema and degenerative disc disease. She also suffered from depression, anxiety and possibly dementia. At the time of the appeal the Applicant was also awaiting further diagnoses. The Respondent denied her claim initially and after reconsideration. She appealed to the Office of the Commissioner of Review Tribunals. Pursuant to the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, the matter was transferred to the General Division of the Social Security Tribunal on April 1, 2013. After a hearing, the General Division dismissed the appeal in a decision dated November 28, 2014.
[4] In the Application for Leave to Appeal, the Applicant submitted that she continued to be disabled and unable to work, that the General Division based its decision on the opinion of only one doctor, that she was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and was awaiting further diagnoses.
[5] The Respondent filed no submissions.
Analysis
[6] In order to be granted leave to appeal, the Applicant must present some arguable ground upon which the proposed appeal might succeed: Kerth v. Canada (Minister of Development), [1999] FCJ No. 1252 (FC). The Federal Court of Appeal has also found that an arguable case at law is akin to determining whether legally an applicant has a reasonable chance of success: Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) v. Hogervorst, 2007 FCA 4, Fancy v. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2010 FCA 63.
[7] The Department of Employment and Social Development Act governs the operation of this Tribunal. Section 58 of the Act sets out the only grounds of appeal that may be considered to grant leave to appeal a decision of the General Division (this is set out in the Appendix to this decision). Therefore, I must decide if the Applicant has put forward a ground of appeal under section 58 of the Act that has a reasonable chance of success on appeal.
[8] The Applicant wrote that she was disabled and unable to work. This information was before the General Division when it made its decision. The repetition of this is not a ground of appeal that has a reasonable chance of success on appeal.
[9] The Applicant also argued that the General Division erred as it based its decision on only one doctor’s opinion regarding her medical condition. The decision summarized all of the medical evidence and the testimony given at the hearing. It considered all of this evidence in reaching the decision that the Applicant was not disabled under the Canada Pension Plan. Therefore, this argument is not a ground of appeal that has a reasonable chance of success on appeal.
[10] The Applicant further contended that she had been diagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis and was awaiting further diagnoses. She did not allege that these medical conditions existed at the time of the Minimum Qualifying Period, or that the General Division made any error in its consideration of this information. If these conditions were not present at the Minimum Qualifying Period the General Division made no error in not considering them. Without some information that indicates that these conditions existed at that time and what impact they had on the Applicant, I cannot find that the General Division made any error in its treatment of this evidence. Therefore, this argument also has no reasonable chance of success on appeal.
Conclusion
[11] The Application is refused because the Applicant has not presented a ground of appeal that has a reasonable chance of success on appeal.
Appendix
Department of Employment and Social Development Act
58.(1) The only grounds of appeal are that
- (a) ) the General Division failed to observe a principle of natural justice or otherwise acted beyond or refused to exercise its jurisdiction;
- (b) the General Division erred in law in making its decision, whether or not the error appears on the face of the record; or
- (c) ) the General Division based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it.
58. (2) Leave to appeal is refused if the Appeal Division is satisfied that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success.