Stelfox v. Canada (Minister of Social Development)

Stelfox v. Canada (Minister of Social Development) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2006-03-22 Neutral citation 2006 FCA 122 File numbers A-318-05 Decision Content Date: 20060322 Docket: A-318-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 122 CORAM: SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: LUCY STELFOX Applicant and MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (formerly Minister of Human Resources Development) Respondent Heard at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 22, 2006. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 22, 2006. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SEXTON J.A. CONCURRED IN BY: EVANS J.A. MALONE J.A. Date: 20060322 Docket: A-318-05 Citation: 2006 FCA 122 CORAM: SEXTON J.A. EVANS J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: LUCY STELFOX Applicant and MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (formerly Minister of Human Resources Development) Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta, on March 22, 2006) SEXTON J.A. [1] The Applicant seeks judicial review of the decision of the Pension Appeals Board which dismissed the Applicant's appeal from the Review Tribunal which in turn had dismissed the Applicant's application for disability benefits relating to her medical conditions of fibromyalgia and psychiatric problems. [2] The Board in its Reasons thoroughly canvassed the relevant evidence, examined the relevant legal authorities and concluded that the Applicant had failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that she was disabled within the meaning of the paragraph 42(2)a of the Canada Pension Plan. [3] The Board, while recognizing that the Applicant did suffer from fibromyalgia and psychiatric problems pointed out there was medical evidence that the Applicant should be considering a return to work, and that fibromyalgia patients cannot afford not to exercise. Further the Board found that the Applicant not only did not work, but she did not look for, or apply anywhere for work suitable to her condition, and that she did not take any retraining. [4] We are of the view that the Board applied the correct legal test, and that no error is apparent in its assessment of the evidence. [5] We are therefore unable to say that the Board's decision was erroneous in law or that its finding of fact was patently unreasonable. While we have sympathy for the plight of the Applicant, this Court cannot retry cases on the merits. [6] The application for judicial review will therefore be dismissed. "J. Edgar Sexton" ________________________ J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-318-05 (ON APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE PENSION APPEALS BOARD DATED JUNE 3, 2005) STYLE OF CAUSE: LUCY STELFOX and MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (formerly Minister of Human Resources Development) PLACE OF HEARING: EDMONTON, AB DATE OF HEARING: MARCH 22, 2006 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SEXTON, EVANS, MALONE JJ.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: SEXTON, J.A. APPEARANCES: MR. JAMES MANDICK FOR THE APPLICANT MS. FLORENCE CLANCY FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: JAMES W. MANDICK PROFESSIONAL CORP. Edmonton, Alberta FOR THE APPLICANT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SDC/HRSDC LEGAL SERVICES Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT