Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
Judicial review of a CERB ineligibility decision was granted because the CRA agent failed to meaningfully address the applicant's central COVID-19 disruption evidence.
The Federal Court dismissed Heather Sinclair’s judicial review of a CRA CERB eligibility decision, finding the record did not prove the $5,000 income threshold.
Federal Court dismissed Erin Gray’s judicial review of CRA’s refusal of CERB, finding the eligibility decision reasonable and the process fair.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a CRB eligibility decision, finding the Applicant failed to prove the $5,000 income threshold and that the CRA Officer acted reasonably.
Because auto-enrolment was not possible and the application date therefore controls retroactivity, the OAS Act limits GIS back payments to 11 months before the application; the Tribunal lacks authority to order additional payments or to compel the Minister to remediate alleged erroneous advice, so the appellant is not entitled to payments for July–November 2022 and the appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Contrôle judiciaire rejeté : la Cour fédérale conclut que l’ARC a raisonnablement refusé les prestations à Mme Méthot faute de preuve suffisante du revenu minimal requis.
The Federal Court dismissed Ms. Higham’s judicial review of a CRA CERB ineligibility decision, finding the decision reasonable and the process procedurally fair.
Judicial review allowed where the Federal Court found the Administrator’s reasons inadequately explained conflicting medical evidence about unilateral limb differences in a thalidomide-support eligibility decision.
On the balance of probabilities the Minister proved the appellant ceased to be disabled as of January 2022 because medical evidence showed improved functional limitations and the appellant was regularly capable of performing substantially gainful work from that date, as evidenced by sustained full‑time contract engagements and earnings above the substantially gainful thresholds; employer flexibility did not render the work benevolent and therefore did not negate the reality of the appellant's capacity to work.
Source excerpt
Judicial review dismissed. The Court held the CRA reasonably found JCP payments were living support, not employment income, and that the process was fair.
Explore more
