
Benefits & Social Security judgments from Canadian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
In this case, the Federal Court granted judicial review and ordered the case to be reconsidered due to the decision-maker's failure to consider the claimant's evidence of overpayment. The court ruled that the decision-maker must adequately address all evidence presented by the claimant when determining eligibility for benefits.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal awarded the claimant income replacement benefits following a motor vehicle accident. The claimant's request for caregiver benefits was denied.
The Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed the claimant's application for accident benefits because the claimant could not prove that the accident caused injuries that prevented him from working or studying and resulted in a permanent impairment.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging the Canada Revenue Agency's decision regarding the claimant's eligibility for the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB). The Court upheld the decision, finding it reasonable and the process fair.
The Federal Court denied an extension requested by someone seeking judicial review of a decision denying their application for benefits from the Canada a person Agency (a person). The court found that the claimant did not provide sufficient evidence or reasons to justify extending the time limit set by law.
In this case, a self-represented litigant successfully challenged a decision by the Canada Revenue Agency (a person) regarding their eligibility for the Canada Recovery Benefit. The Federal Court found that the a person officer's reasons for rejecting an invoice as proof of income were insufficiently explained and transparent.
The Federal Court overturned a decision by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) regarding an applicant's eligibility for the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB). The Court determined that the CRA's rejection of the applicant's income proof was unreasonable and lacked sufficient justification.
The Federal Court ruled that a decision made by the Canada Revenue Agency (a person) regarding an individual’s eligibility for benefits was unreasonable because it did not take into account the person's a person proposal under bankruptcy law. This means the a person must reconsider its decision in light of the legal requirements.
A person seeking benefits under the CRB program successfully challenged a denial by the a person. The Federal Court ruled that the decision was unreasonable because it did not properly account for the claimant's reduced working hours during the pandemic.
The Federal Court dismissed a dental hygienist's application to review a Canada Revenue Agency (a person) decision denying her eligibility for CERB and CRCB benefits. The court ruled that the a person's decision was reasonable due to lack of evidence provided by the applicant.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging a decision by a Canada Revenue Agency officer regarding the applicant's eligibility for the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB). The court found the decision reasonable, as it was justified, intelligible, and transparent.
A self-represented litigant challenged a Canada Revenue Agency (a person) decision denying their eligibility for CERB benefits. The Federal Court dismissed the challenge, ruling that the a person's reasoning was reasonable given the documentation provided by the applicant.