The Estate of JS v Minister of Employment and Social Development

The Estate of JS v Minister of Employment and Social Development Collection Other Canada Pension Plan (CPP) Decision date 2025-11-17 Neutral citation 2025 SST 1185 Reference number AD-25-706 Member Kate Sellar Division Appeal Division Decision Application for leave to appeal refused Related decisions SST - The Estate of JS v Minister of Employment and Social Development - 2025 SST 1186 - 2025-10-08 - General Division Decision Content Citation: The Estate of JS v Minister of Employment and Social Development, 2025 SST 1185 Social Security Tribunal of Canada Appeal Division Leave to Appeal Decision Applicant: The Estate of J. S. Respondent: Minister of Employment and Social Development Decision under appeal: General Division decision dated October 8, 2025 (GP-25-1462) Tribunal member: Kate Sellar Decision date: November 17, 2025 File number: AD-25-706 On this page Decision Overview Issues I’m not giving the Claimant permission to appeal Conclusion Decision [1] I’ve refused to give the Claimant leave (permission) to appeal. The appeal will not proceed. These are the reasons for my decision. Overview [2] The Claimant is the Estate of the late J. S. (J. S.). J. S. applied for a retirement pension under the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) on July 18, 2016. The Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister) allowed her application and sent her a letter of entitlement. On April 6, 2017, family members wrote to ask the Minister to reconsider the date the pension started. [3] On February 7, 2018, the Minister reconsidered its decision and refused to change the effective date of the pension.Footnote 1 [4] The Estate appealed the reconsideration decision to this Tribunal on September 9, 2025.Footnote 2 J. S.’s nephew (RS) represented the Estate. The General Division found that the appeal was too late to go ahead. Issues [5] The issues in this appeal are: a) Is there an arguable case that the General Division made any error that would justify giving the Claimant permission to appeal? b) Does the application set out evidence that wasn’t presented to the General Division? I’m not giving the Claimant permission to appeal [6] I can give the Claimant permission to appeal if the application raises an arguable case that the General Division: didn’t follow a fair process; acted beyond its powers or refused to exercise those powers; made an error of law; made an error of fact; or made an error applying the law to the facts.Footnote 3 [7] I can also give the Claimant permission to appeal if the application sets out evidence that wasn’t presented to the General Division.Footnote 4 [8] Since the Claimant hasn’t raised an arguable case and hasn’t set out new evidence, I must refuse permission to appeal. There’s no arguable case that the General Division made an error that would justify granting the Claimant permission to appeal. [9] The Claimant argues that there was an appeal to the General Division filed in a timely manner. The Claimant hasn’t been able to provide any documents to show this but feels that it was misplaced. Several people are willing to swear affidavits to support the Claimant’s “initial timely response” to the reconsideration letter.Footnote 5 The General Division explained that the Claimant’s appeal was too late to go ahead. [10] The General Division explained that it had to decide whether the Claimant’s September 9, 2025 appeal was on time. If the Claimant was late, the General Division had to decide whether the Claimant was too late to get extra time (an extension). [11] The law says that claimants have 90 days from the day the Minister communicated its reconsideration decision to appeal to the General Division. If a claimant appeals after that, the General Division can give them more time, but in no case can a claimant appeal a reconsideration decision more than a year after the Minister told them about it.Footnote 6 [12] The General Division found that: The nephew handling the estate received the reconsideration letter in February 2018Footnote 7 The Tribunal received an appeal on September 9, 2025. [13] The General Division acknowledged the terrible family losses and challenges that affected their ability to appeal. However, the General Division explained that it must follow the law, and in no case can an appeal go ahead when the Claimant files more than a year after the Minister communicates the reconsideration decision.Footnote 8 The Claimant hasn’t raised an arguable case for any error that could justify giving permission to appeal. [14] The Claimant hasn’t raised an arguable case for an error by the General Division. [15] While the Claimant is now stating that a timely appeal was filed with the General Division, I have no record of that appeal at the General Division. [16] A document is considered filed with the Tribunal on the date the Tribunal receives it. Footnote 9 There’s nothing in the law that would allow the General Division to consider an appeal filed based solely on a date a party can later swear that they sent it. [17] The General Division explained that in no case can an appeal proceed if it’s filed after the one-year mark. The appeal that the General Division has the power to consider here is the one filed September 9, 2025. That September 9, 2025 appeal cannot proceed because it was filed more than a year after the Claimant received the reconsideration letter. The Claimant has raised no arguable case for an error by the General Division in that regard. The Claimant hasn’t set out new evidence that could justify granting permission to appeal. [18] The Claimant hasn’t set out any new evidence that could justify granting permission to appeal. [19] I’ve reviewed the written record.Footnote 10 I’m satisfied there isn’t any other evidence that the General Division may have misconstrued or overlooked that would justify giving permission to appeal. [20] I understand the Claimant’s interest in ensuring that there is a reliable and fair system for appealing decisions about entitlement to public pension benefits. However, the current law does include a hard deadline for appeals to this Tribunal. [21] The Tribunal is required to follow the law, including that deadline. Conclusion [22] I’ve refused to give the Claimant permission to appeal. This means that the appeal will not proceed. Footnotes Footnote 1 See GD2-13. Footnote 2 See GD1. Footnote 3 See section 58.1(a) and (b) in the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (Act). Footnote 4 See section 58.1(c) in the Act. Footnote 5 See AD1-7. Footnote 6 See section 52 of the Act. Footnote 7 See paragraph 9 in the General Division decision. Footnote 8 See paragraphs 7 to 12 in the General Division decision. Footnote 9 See section 19(2) in the Social Security Tribunal Rules of Procedure. Footnote 10 For more on this kind of review by the Appeal Division, see Karadeolian v Canada (Attorney General), 2016 FC 615.