The Estate of FF v Minister of Employment and Social Development

The Estate of FF v Minister of Employment and Social Development

Proceeding will be by teleconference because the representative indicated teleconference/videoconference as an initial preference, effectively participated in the PHC by teleconference, the Tribunal must act informally and expeditiously given COVID-19 constraints and the Respondent's interest in timely resolution, and teleconference is more suitable than videoconference given the representative's limited computer skills; the Estate of F. B. will not be added as a party because the Respondent remitted the overpayment, so the Estate lacks the requisite direct interest under the Regulations and applicable case law.

Citation
2021 SST 256
Parties
Appellant (claimant): The Estate of F. F.; Respondent (minister): Minister of Employment and Social Development
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement Appeal / Interlocutory Pre Hearing Conference
Outcome
Teleconference hearing ordered; Estate of F. B. not added as a party; issues concerning the merits reserved for the hearing.
Legal Topics
Old Age Security, Guaranteed Income Supplement, Overpayment, Common Law Relationship, Procedural Fairness, Form of Hearing
Source Language
English
Social Security Administrative Law Family Law Old Age Security Guaranteed Income Supplement Overpayment Common Law Relationship Procedural Fairness +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Estate of F. F.

Appellant (claimant)

Minister of Employment and Social Development

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement Appeal / Interlocutory Pre Hearing Conference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing should proceed by teleconference or in person
  2. 2 Whether the Estate of F. B. should be added as a party
  3. 3 Whether issues raised at the PHC are procedural or relate to the merits

Ratio Decidendi

Proceeding will be by teleconference because the representative indicated teleconference/videoconference as an initial preference, effectively participated in the PHC by teleconference, the Tribunal must act informally and expeditiously given COVID-19 constraints and the Respondent's interest in timely resolution, and teleconference is more suitable than videoconference given the representative's limited computer skills; the Estate of F. B. will not be added as a party because the Respondent remitted the overpayment, so the Estate lacks the requisite direct interest under the Regulations and applicable case law.

Court Disposition

Teleconference hearing ordered; Estate of F. B. not added as a party; issues concerning the merits reserved for the hearing.

Orders

  • Proceed with the hearing by teleconference
  • Do not add the Estate of F. B. as a party to this proceeding