WW v Minister of Employment and Social Development

WW v Minister of Employment and Social Development

The Appeal Division allowed the appeal because the claimant credibly established she sent the promised additional medical evidence within the deadline (library log and manager's letter), the documents were relevant to the central disability issue and could have affected the outcome, and by issuing a decision without considering those documents the General Division breached the claimant's right to be heard under principles of natural justice; the proper remedy is to remit the matter to the General Division for a new hearing.

Citation
2021 SST 18
Parties
Appellant (claimant): W. W.; Respondent (minister): Minister of Employment and Social Development
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Canada Pension Plan Disability Appeal / Appeal Division Decision (leave to Appeal Granted)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter returned to the General Division for rehearing
Legal Topics
Natural Justice, Admission of Evidence, Remedy Remand, Lost/misplaced Documents, Access to Justice
Source Language
English
Administrative Law Social Security Canada Pension Plan Procedural Fairness Evidence Natural Justice Admission of Evidence Remedy Remand +2 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W. W.

Appellant (claimant)

Minister of Employment and Social Development

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Canada Pension Plan Disability Appeal / Appeal Division Decision (leave to Appeal Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant submitted additional medical evidence within the established deadline
  2. 2 Whether the General Division breached the principles of natural justice by failing to consider evidence it had promised to allow
  3. 3 Whether exclusion of the evidence was harmless or could have affected the outcome

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Division allowed the appeal because the claimant credibly established she sent the promised additional medical evidence within the deadline (library log and manager's letter), the documents were relevant to the central disability issue and could have affected the outcome, and by issuing a decision without considering those documents the General Division breached the claimant's right to be heard under principles of natural justice; the proper remedy is to remit the matter to the General Division for a new hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter returned to the General Division for rehearing

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Matter returned to the General Division for a new hearing with directions