Old Age Security (OAS) and Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS)

Decision and reasons

Decision

[1] Based on the agreement reached during a settlement conference, I am giving R. M. (Claimant), permission to appeal and allowing his appeal. I am returning the appeal to the General Division for reconsideration.

Overview

[2] The Claimant applied for an Old Age Security (OAS) pension in August 2013. Whether he qualifies for that pension depends largely on when he resided in Canada, and for how long.

[3] The Minister refused the Claimant’s application for an OAS pension in October 2019.^{Footnote 1} The Minister decided that the Claimant had not resided in Canada since August 1996. So, he needed 20 years of residence in Canada to qualify for an OAS pension, but he had just 16.^{Footnote 2}

[4] The Claimant appealed the Minister’s decision to the Tribunal’s General Division. It agreed that the Claimant had not resided in Canada after August 1996, and dismissed his appeal.

[5] In its decision, the General Division recognized that there was evidence showing that the Claimant might have re-established his residence in Canada after 2013.^{Footnote 3} However, it is not clear that the General Division considered the Claimant’s residence in Canada during this period. Instead, it might have just considered the period before the Claimant submitted his application for an OAS pension.

[6] The Claimant’s residence in Canada after 2013 is relevant to his case. For example, if the Claimant re-established his residence in Canada—even after submitting his application—then he needs just 10 (instead of 20) years of residence in Canada to qualify for an OAS pension.^{Footnote 4}

Settlement agreement

[7] The parties to the appeal attended a settlement conference on May 10, 2021. At the conference, the parties came to this agreement:

1. The General Division made an error of law.^{Footnote 5} Although it was relevant, the General Division did not consider whether the Claimant re-established his residence in Canada after August 2013.
2. As a result, it is appropriate to give the Claimant permission to appeal, allow his appeal, and return the appeal to the General Division.^{Footnote 6} The General Division will decide whether the Claimant resided in Canada after August 2013, and the consequences of that decision on his eligibility for an OAS pension.
3. I am returning the appeal to the General Division with these directions:
   • The appeal will be assigned to a different General Division member; and
   • The new General Division member will give the Claimant a reasonable amount of time to file new and updated information about his residence in Canada after August 2013. The new General Division member will schedule a case management conference to discuss this question.

Conclusion

[8] Based on the information available to me, I am giving the Claimant permission to appeal and allowing his appeal in line with the settlement agreement outlined above.