Scheuneman v. Canada (Human Resources Development)

Scheuneman v. Canada (Human Resources Development)

Subsection 66(4) of the Canada Pension Plan provides an adequate alternative statutory remedy for harms caused by administrative error in wrongful termination of disability benefits; as a matter of public policy that statutory remedy precludes a tort claim for negligence arising from the same administrative error,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2005 FCA 254
Parties
Appellant: Eric Scheuneman; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen (Social Development Canada formerly Human Resources Development Canada)
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Federal Court Judgment Concerning Administrative Termination of Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefits / Federal Court of Appeal Judgment (decision on Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; no costs awarded
Legal Topics
Administrative Error, Duty of Care, Alternative Statutory Remedy, Canada Pension Plan Remedial Power S.66(4), Termination and Reinstatement of Disability Benefits, Charter S.7 – Security of the Person
Source Language
english
Administrative Law Tort (negligence) Constitutional Law (charter) Social Security / Benefits Law Administrative Error Duty of Care Alternative Statutory Remedy Canada Pension Plan Remedial Power S.66(4) +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Scheuneman

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen (Social Development Canada formerly Human Resources Development Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Federal Court Judgment Concerning Administrative Termination of Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefits / Federal Court of Appeal Judgment (decision on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a duty of care in tort exists for administrative errors leading to termination of CPP disability benefits
  2. 2 Whether subsection 66(4) of the Canada Pension Plan provides an adequate alternative remedy that precludes a tort claim
  3. 3 Whether suspension and delayed reinstatement of benefits engaged s.7 Charter protection for liberty and security of the person

Ratio Decidendi

Subsection 66(4) of the Canada Pension Plan provides an adequate alternative statutory remedy for harms caused by administrative error in wrongful termination of disability benefits; as a matter of public policy that statutory remedy precludes a tort claim for negligence arising from the same administrative error, and the Charter s.7 claim failed because only economic interests were affected; therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; no costs awarded

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • No costs awarded