Date: 20080922
Docket: A-91-08
Citation: 2008 FCA 277
CORAM: NADON J.A.
SEXTON J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
BETWEEN:
MARIA ROMITA
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on September
18, 2008.
Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on
September 22, 2008.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SEXTON
J.A.
CONCURRED
IN BY: NADON
J.A.
PELLETIER J.A.
Date: 20080922
Docket: A-91-08
Citation: 2008 FCA 277
CORAM: NADON
J.A.
SEXTON
J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
BETWEEN:
MARIA ROMITA
Applicant
and
ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SEXTON J.A.
[1]
The
applicant applied for a disability pension in April 2003. She claimed to have
many disabling conditions with the main one being irritable bowel syndrome. The
applicant stopped working on February 1, 2002, due to her medical condition.
Her application for disability benefits was denied by the Commission.
[2]
The
applicant appealed the respondent’s decision to the Office of the Commissioner
of Canada Pension Plan Review Tribunals. In a decision the Review Tribunal held
that the applicant did not meet the definitions of severe and prolonged disability
as provided in the Plan.
[3]
The
applicant sought and was granted leave to appeal the decision of the Review
Tribunal to the Pension Appeals Board which held that there was insufficient
evidence to demonstrate that the applicant was suffering from a severe and
prolonged disability and hence was not eligible to receive a disability
pension.
[4]
This is an
application to set aside the decision of the Pension Appeals Board (“Board”)
dated January 18, 2008.
[5]
The issue
before this Court is whether the Board committed a reviewable error in finding
that the applicant was not suffering from a severe and prolonged disability.
The standard of review of the decision of the Board is one of reasonableness.
[6]
I am of
the view that the Board, having reviewed the evidence, correctly identified the
issue to be determined and applied the correct legal test, that is, whether the
applicant had a severe and prolonged disability such as to render her incapable,
regularly, of pursuing any substantially gainful occupation.
[7]
As a
result, I am unable to conclude that the decision of the Board was
unreasonable.
[8]
The application for judicial review should
therefore be dismissed without costs.
“J. Edgar Sexton”
“I
agree
M. Nadon J.A.”
“I
agree
J.D. Denis Pelletier J.A.”
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-91-08
(APPEAL
FROM A JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PENSION APPEALS BOARD’S DECISION DATED JANUARY 18,
2008, FILE NO. CP24116.)
STYLE
OF CAUSE: MARIA ROMITA v. ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: SEPTEMBER 18, 2008
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: SEXTON J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: NADON J.A.
PELLETIER
J.A.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 22, 2008
APPEARANCES:
MARIA ROMITA
|
FOR
THE APPLICANT (on her own behalf)
|
MARIE-JOSÉE BLAIS
|
FOR
THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
MARIA ROMITA
BOLTON,
ONTARIO
|
FOR THE APPLICANT (on her own behalf)
|
JOHN H. SIMS, Q.C.
DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|