The Estate of RV v Minister of Employment and Social Development

The Estate of RV v Minister of Employment and Social Development Collection Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability Decision date 2023-07-11 Neutral citation 2023 SST 1029 Reference number GP-21-1946 Member James Beaton Division General Division Decision Appeal dismissed Decision Content Citation: The Estate of RV v Minister of Employment and Social Development, 2023 SST 1029 Social Security Tribunal of Canada General Division – Income Security Section Decision Appellant: The Estate of R. V. Respondent: Minister of Employment and Social Development Decision under appeal: Minister of Employment and Social Development reconsideration decision dated July 15, 2021 (issued by Service Canada) Tribunal member: James Beaton Type of hearing: Videoconference Hearing date: July 10, 2023 Hearing participants: None Decision date: July 11, 2023 File number: GP-21-1946 On this page Decision Overview The appeal is dismissed Conclusion Decision [1] The appeal is dismissed. [2] The Appellant, The Estate of R. V., isn’t eligible for a Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability pension. This decision explains why I am dismissing the appeal. Overview [3] The Appellant in this appeal is technically the Estate of R. V. However, in the rest of this decision, I will refer to the Appellant as though I am referring to R. V. personally. [4] The Appellant applied for a CPP disability pension on March 26, 2021.Footnote 1 The Minister of Employment and Social Development refused her application. The Appellant asked the Minister to reconsider its decision. The Minister maintained its decision on reconsideration. On September 13, 2021, the Appellant appealed the Minister’s decision to the Social Security Tribunal’s General Division.Footnote 2 [5] On October 17, 2022, the Minister provided the Tribunal with a copy of the Appellant’s death certificate. The certificate shows that the Appellant passed away on June 7, 2022, and that she was married at the time.Footnote 3 [6] On October 24, 2022, the Minister provided the address and phone number of the person who applied for the Death Benefit in relation to the Appellant.Footnote 4 That person has the same address and last name as the Appellant. [7] Within a few days, the Tribunal sent a letter to that address by regular mail. The letter said that if someone wanted to pursue the appeal on behalf of the estate, they would need to submit a completed solemn declaration form, which was included with the letter. The letter added that “the matter will be dismissed if you do not provide the necessary documents to establish your authority as estate representative.” The Tribunal didn’t receive a response to the letter. [8] On December 15, 2022, Tribunal staff phoned the person who applied for the Death Benefit. During the phone call, that person confirmed that he was the husband of the Appellant and that he wanted to withdraw the appeal. Tribunal staff told him that the Tribunal could not process his withdrawal request until it had confirmation of his right to represent the estate. Tribunal staff asked him to submit a completed solemn declaration form for this purpose. The form was emailed to his email address on December 15, 2022; February 7, 2023; and March 15, 2023. The Tribunal received no response. [9] On May 4, 2023, the Tribunal sent a letter by regular mail to the address on file for the Appellant, which is also the Appellant’s husband’s address.Footnote 5 The letter said the appeal could not proceed or be withdrawn unless the Tribunal received a completed solemn declaration form from someone who could represent the Appellant’s estate. The Tribunal attached the solemn declaration form to the letter and set a deadline of June 7, 2023—one year from the Appellant’s death, and over a month from the date of the letter—to receive the completed form. The letter said the Tribunal would dismiss the appeal if it didn’t receive the necessary documentation by the deadline. [10] As of June 7, 2023, the Tribunal had not received a completed solemn declaration form or further information (verbally or in writing) from the Appellant’s husband or anyone else wanting to represent the Appellant’s estate. No one attended the hearing [11] The Tribunal scheduled a hearing for July 10, 2023. It sent a Notice of Hearing by registered mail to the Appellant’s and her husband’s address. The Notice of Hearing was picked up on June 25, 2023. Under the Social Security Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure (Rules), the Notice is considered to have been received on June 25.Footnote 6 The appeal is dismissed [12] I am dismissing the appeal because the Appellant has died and no one has come forward to pursue the appeal on behalf of her estate. [13] The law doesn’t say what process the Tribunal should follow when an appellant dies before a hearing. However, the law says I can decide the procedure for anything not addressed by the Rules. When I do this, I must ensure that the procedure is as simple and quick as fairness allows. The overall appeal process should be flexible.Footnote 7 [14] I believe the Tribunal has taken steps to ensure that it deals with the appeal in a way that is simple, quick, and fair. [15] First, the Tribunal got the contact information for the person who applied for the Death Benefit in relation to the Appellant’s estate. Then the Tribunal used that information to contact the Appellant’s husband. The Tribunal provided instructions for him to follow if he wanted to pursue or officially withdraw the appeal. The Tribunal gave him ample time to do so. The Tribunal followed up by phone and email. In addition, the Tribunal sent a letter to the Appellant’s address on file (which is the same as the Appellant’s husband’s address). Neither the Appellant’s husband nor anyone else responded to the letter. [16] Finally, the Tribunal scheduled a hearing and sent a Notice of Hearing to the Appellant’s and her husband’s address by registered mail. [17] The Rules say the Tribunal uses the contact information it has on file when it contacts a party or sends them a document. The Rules also say the Tribunal may continue the appeal process even if it can’t reach a party using the contact information that the party gave it. The Tribunal may do this without giving further notice to the party.Footnote 8 [18] At this point, I believe that dismissing the appeal for procedural reasons—the lack of a live appellant or representative to pursue the appeal—is an appropriate way to bring these proceedings to an end so that they don’t continue indefinitely. The Tribunal followed a simple, quick, and fair process in reaching this outcome. Conclusion [19] The Appellant isn’t eligible for a CPP disability pension. [20] This means the appeal is dismissed. Footnotes Footnote 1 See GD2-26 and 61. Footnote 2 See GD1. Footnote 3 See GD4-2. Footnote 4 The Death Benefit is a one-time payment that is usually paid to the estate of a person who contributed to the Canada Pension Plan, if certain requirements are met. Footnote 5 See GD5. Footnote 6 See section 22(1) and (3) of the Rules. Footnote 7 See sections 6(a) and (d), and 8(1) and (5) of the Rules. Footnote 8 See section 9 of the Rules.