Canada (Attorney General) v. Lemoine
Court headnote
Canada (Attorney General) v. Lemoine Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-09-09 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 330 File numbers A-717-02 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2003. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on September 9, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SEXTON J.A. Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, September 9, 2003) SEXTON J.A. [1] At the hearing in this Court the parties agreed that the Pension Appeals Board had committed an error of law in applying the wrong legal test. [2] The test applied by the Pension Appeals Board was that "the employment in which the applicant is now engaged cannot be described as something at which the applicant is regularly engaged". [3] The proper test involves determining whether the applicant is "incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation" as set forth in paragraph 42(2)(a)(i) of the Canada Pension Plan. [4] The parties further agreed that this error warranted the setting aside of the decision of the Pension Appeals Board. [5] The Court was further advised by …
Read full judgment
Canada (Attorney General) v. Lemoine Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2003-09-09 Neutral citation 2003 FCA 330 File numbers A-717-02 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent Heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 9, 2003. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario on September 9, 2003. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SEXTON J.A. Date: 20030909 Docket: A-717-02 Citation: 2003 FCA 330 CORAM: RICHARD C.J. ROTHSTEIN J.A. SEXTON J.A. BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Applicant and JOYCE LEMOINE Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, September 9, 2003) SEXTON J.A. [1] At the hearing in this Court the parties agreed that the Pension Appeals Board had committed an error of law in applying the wrong legal test. [2] The test applied by the Pension Appeals Board was that "the employment in which the applicant is now engaged cannot be described as something at which the applicant is regularly engaged". [3] The proper test involves determining whether the applicant is "incapable regularly of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation" as set forth in paragraph 42(2)(a)(i) of the Canada Pension Plan. [4] The parties further agreed that this error warranted the setting aside of the decision of the Pension Appeals Board. [5] The Court was further advised by the parties that the matter had been settled between them. [6] The application for judicial review will therefore be allowed and the decision of the Pension Appeals Board will be set aside without costs. [7] The matter is remitted for redetermination by the Pension Appeals Board. "J. EDGAR SEXTON" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-717-02 STYLE OF CAUSE: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA v. JOYCE LEMOINE PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: September 9, 2003 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Richard, C.J., Rothstein, Sexton JJ.A.) RENDERED FROM THE BENCH BY: Sexton, J.A. APPEARANCES: Mr. John Vaissi Nagy for the Applicant Mr. Jacques Chartrand for the Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mr. Morris Rosenberg for the Applicant Deputy Attorney General of Canada West End Legal Services of Ottawa for the Respondent Ottawa, Ontario
Source: decisions.fca-caf.gc.ca