Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability

Decision and reasons

Decision

[1] The application for leave to appeal is refused.

Overview

[2] In September 2017, R. T. (Applicant) applied for a disability pension under the Canada Pension Plan. A few weeks later, the Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister) denied his application. The Applicant asked the Minister to reconsider its initial decision, but the decision was upheld on June 20, 2018.

[3] On August 19, 2019, the Applicant appealed that decision to the Tribunal’s General Division. However, the General Division found that the appeal had not been filed on time. As a result, it stated that the appeal will not proceed.

[4] The Applicant now wants to appeal the General Division’s decision to the Appeal Division. However, before the matter can proceed, the Applicant needs leave to appeal the General Division decision.

[5] Unfortunately for the Applicant, I have concluded that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success. As a result, I cannot grant him leave to appeal. These are the reasons for my decision.

Issue

[6] Has the Applicant raised an arguable case on which the appeal might succeed?

Analysis

[7] The Tribunal must apply the law and follow certain procedures.^{Footnote 1} As a result, this appeal must follow a two-step process: the leave to appeal stage and the merits stage. If the appeal has no reasonable chance of success, it cannot proceed to the merits stage.^{Footnote 2}

[8] The legal test that the Applicant needs to meet at this stage is a low one: Is there any arguable case on which the appeal might succeed?^{Footnote 3} To answer that question, I must determine whether the General Division made at least one of the three errors (or grounds of appeal) set out in section 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (DESD Act).

Has the Applicant raised an arguable case on which the appeal might succeed?

[9] The General Division found that it was required to apply section 52(2) of the DESD Act. This provision stipulates that the General Division can grant an extension of time only to appellants who file their appeal within the year following the date on which the reconsideration decision was communicated to them.

[10] This obstacle was brought to the Applicant’s attention in a letter from the Tribunal dated September 3, 2019, and in the Minister’s recommendation dated September 30, 2019,^{Footnote 4} but the Applicant never disputed the fact that his notice of appeal was filed over a year late.

[11] Since the Applicant did not appeal on time, the General Division stated that the appeal will not proceed.

[12] The Applicant’s application for leave to appeal does not fall easily within the legal framework that governs the Appeal Division. In particular, the Applicant did not specify errors set out in section 58(1) of the DESD Act that the General Division might have made.^{Footnote 5} Therefore, I find that the Applicant has not raised an arguable case on which the appeal might succeed.

[13] The Applicant instead reiterated his incapacity to work. He also filed other documents to support his disability claim. However, the law prevents me from considering these documents.^{Footnote 6}

[14] Regardless of technical deficiencies in the application for leave to appeal, I cannot stop at the precise grounds of appeal that the Applicant has raised.^{Footnote 7} To that end, I have reviewed the documents on file as well as the decision under appeal. I am therefore satisfied that the General Division did not overlook or misconstrue relevant evidence.

Conclusion

[15] While this may not be the answer the Applicant was hoping for, the Tribunal cannot use the principles of equity or consider extenuating circumstances to grant an extension of time to file an appeal. However, nothing prevents the Applicant from reapplying for a disability pension (if he has not already done so) and asking the Minister to consider his new evidence under this new application.

[16] I am sympathetic to the Applicant’s circumstances. Nevertheless, I have concluded that his appeal has no reasonable chance of success. As a result, I have no choice but to refuse his application for leave to appeal.