Canada (Attorney General) v. Lemoine
The Pension Appeals Board applied the wrong legal test; the correct test is whether the applicant is incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation under CPP paragraph 42(2)(a)(i); accordingly the application for judicial review is allowed, the Board's decision is set aside and the matter is...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2003 FCA 330
- Parties
- Applicant: Attorney General of Canada; Respondent: Joyce Lemoine
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 September 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Judicial Review / Federal Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for judicial review allowed; decision of the Pension Appeals Board set aside; matter remitted to the Pension Appeals Board for redetermination; no costs.
- Legal Topics
- Incapacity, Canada Pension Plan Paragraph 42(2)(a)(i), Error of Law, Remittal
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Attorney General of Canada
Applicant
Joyce Lemoine
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Federal Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Pension Appeals Board applied the correct legal test for incapacity under CPP paragraph 42(2)(a)(i)
- 2 Whether the Board's error of law required setting aside its decision and remitting the matter for redetermination
Ratio Decidendi
The Pension Appeals Board applied the wrong legal test; the correct test is whether the applicant is incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation under CPP paragraph 42(2)(a)(i); accordingly the application for judicial review is allowed, the Board's decision is set aside and the matter is remitted for redetermination.
Court Disposition
Application for judicial review allowed; decision of the Pension Appeals Board set aside; matter remitted to the Pension Appeals Board for redetermination; no costs.
Orders
- Application for judicial review allowed
- Decision of the Pension Appeals Board set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Canada (Attorney General) v. Lemoine Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-09-09 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 330 File numbers A-717-02 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2003. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on September 9, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SEXTON J.A. Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, September 9, 2003) SEXTON J.A. [1] At the hearing in this Court the parties agreed that the Pension Appeals Board had committed an error of law in applying the wrong legal test. [2] The test applied by the Pension Appeals Board was that "the employment in which the applicant is now engaged cannot be described as something at which the applicant is regularly engaged". [3] The proper test involves determining whether the applicant is "incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation" as set forth in paragraph 42(2)(a)(i) of the Canada Pension Plan. [4] The parties further agreed that this error warranted the setting aside of the decision of the Pension Appeals Board. [5] The Court was further advised by the parties that the matter had been settled between them. [6] The application for judicial review will therefore be allowed and the decision of the Pension Appeals Board will be set aside without costs. [7] The matter is remitted for redetermination by the Pension Appeals Board. "J. EDGAR SEXTON" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-717-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA v. JOYCE LEMOINE PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: September 9, 2003 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Richard, C.J., Rothstein, Sexton JJ.A.) RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Sexton, J.A. APPEARANCES: Mr. John Vaissi Nagy for the Applicant Mr. Jacques Chartrand for the Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mr. Morris Rosenberg for the Applicant Deputy Attorney General of Canada West End Legal Services of Ottawa for the Respondent Ottawa, Ontario