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

Decision

[1] I am refusing the Applicant, E. H., permission to appeal. This means that the appeal won’t go ahead.

Overview

[2] The Applicant first applied for a pension under the Old Age Security Act (OAS Act) on October 1, 2018. The Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister) refused the application in an initial decision dated February 10, 2020, and then in a reconsideration decision dated June 23, 2022.^{Footnote 1}

[3] The Applicant filed a second pension application on July 21, 2022. On December 8, 2023, the Minister made an initial decision refusing this application.^{Footnote 2}

[4] On January 24, 2024, the Applicant filed a notice of appeal with the Social Security Tribunal’s General Division.^{Footnote 3}

[5] The General Division found that the appeal could not go ahead for the following reasons:

• The Applicant filed her appeal more than one year after the Minister communicated the June 23, 2022, reconsideration decision to her.
• The Tribunal doesn’t have the power to decide the Minister’s initial December 8, 2023, decision about the second pension application. The Tribunal only has the power to review the Minister’s reconsideration decisions.

[6] I find that the appeal doesn’t raise an arguable case that the General Division made an error recognized by the law. Also, the Applicant didn’t present any new evidence. So, I have no choice but to refuse permission to appeal.

Issues

[7] The issues are as follows:

1. a) Could the General Division have made an error by focusing on the June 23, 2022, reconsideration decision instead of the initial December 8, 2023, decision?
2. b) Does the application contain evidence that wasn’t before the General Division?

I am refusing permission to appeal

[8] I can give the Applicant permission to appeal if, in her application, she raised an arguable case that the General Division:

• failed to provide a fair process
• decided an issue it didn’t have the power to decide, or failed to decide an issue it should have decided
• misinterpreted or misapplied the law
• made an error with respect to the facts^{Footnote 4}

[9] I can also give permission to appeal if the application contains evidence that wasn’t before the General Division.^{Footnote 5}

The General Division didn’t make an error by focusing on the wrong decision from the Minister

[10] The Applicant argues that the General Division made an error because it misunderstood that her appeal is about the Minister’s December 8, 2023, decision, not the June 23, 2022,^{Footnote 6} decision.

[11] But it is clear from the letter dated December 8, 2023, that if a person disagrees with the decision, they have to ask the Minister to reconsider.

[12] These guidelines are anchored in the OAS Act. It says that only reconsideration decisions can be appealed to the Tribunal.^{Footnote 7}

[13] The General Division considered both decisions and found that the appeal could not go ahead regardless of the decision under appeal.^{Footnote 8}

[14] So, I find that the Applicant hasn’t raised an arguable case. The General Division didn’t have the power to review the decision that the Applicant says she is challenging.

The application doesn’t contain new evidence

[15] The Applicant’s application is based on the Minister’s letter dated December 8, 2023. She attached the letter to her application. But this letter is also in the appeal file that was before the General Division.^{Footnote 9}

[16] So, I find that the Applicant’s application doesn’t contain any new relevant evidence that wasn’t before the General Division.

[17] In addition to the Applicant’s arguments, I have reviewed the file and the General Division decision.^{Footnote 10} But I haven’t found any other reasons for giving permission to appeal.

Conclusion

[18] Since the Applicant hasn’t raised an arguable case and hasn’t presented new evidence, I have to refuse permission to appeal. This means that the appeal won’t go ahead.