Date: 20080407
Docket: A-409-07
Citation: 2008 FCA
130
CORAM: DESJARDINS J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
CLAUDE
GRENIER
Appellant
and
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
Respondent
Hearing held at Montréal,
Quebec, on April
7, 2008.
Judgment
delivered at Montréal,
Quebec, on April
7, 2008.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:
DESJARDINS J.A.
Date: 20080407
Docket: A-409-07
Citation: 2008 FCA 130
CORAM: DESJARDINS
J.A.
NOËL
J.A.
NADON
J.A.
BETWEEN:
CLAUDE GRENIER
Appellant
and
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE
COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Montréal,
Quebec, on April
7, 2008)
DESJARDINS J.A.
[1]
Mr.
Grenier is appealing a judgment of the Tax Court of Canada which upheld a
decision of the Department of Human Resources Development concerning a $110 overpayment
made to him in 2005 as a guaranteed income supplement under the Old Age
Security Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. O-9 (the Act).
[2]
Mr.
Grenier applied for a guaranteed income supplement in April 2005, making a
statement of income of $20,617 for the 2004 reference year. Mr. Grenier
subsequently realised that under section 14 of the Act, he choose to use 2005
as the reference year, rather than 2004, the advantage being that he did not
have any employment income for 2005, whereas he had earned $7,065 in employment
income in 2004. He estimated his income for 2005 to be $11,892 (($579 + $412) x
12).
[3]
When he
submitted his annual application for the renewal of the guaranteed income
supplement in 2006, he reported income of $16,722 for 2005. This figure
corresponded to the income in his income tax return for 2005.
[4]
The Department
Minister invoked section 18 of the Act, which reads as follows:
|
18. Where it is determined that the income for a base
calendar year (in this section referred to as the “actual income”)
of an applicant for a supplement does not accord with the income of
the applicant (in this section referred to as the “shown income”)
calculated on the basis of a statement or an estimate made under section 14, the
following adjustments shall be made:
|
18. Lorsqu’il est établi que le revenu du
demandeur d’un supplément pour l’année de référence, appelé « revenu
réel » au présent article, ne coïncide pas avec le revenu,
appelé « revenu déclaré » au présent article, calculé sur la
base d’une déclaration ou d’une estimation établie aux termes de l’article
14, les rectifications suivantes doivent être apportées :
|
|
(a) if the actual income exceeds the shown income,
any amount by which the supplement paid to the applicant for months in the
payment period exceeds the supplement that would have been paid to the
applicant for those months if the shown income had been equal to the actual
income shall be deducted and retained out of any subsequent payments of
supplement or pension made to the applicant, in any manner that may be
prescribed; and
|
a) si le revenu réel dépasse le revenu déclaré,
le trop-payé fait l’objet, selon les modalités réglementaires, d’une retenue
opérée sur les paiements ultérieurs de supplément ou de pension;
|
|
(b) if the shown
income exceeds the actual income, there shall be paid to the applicant
any amount by which the supplement that would have been paid to the applicant
for months in the payment period if the actual income had been equal to the
shown income exceeds the supplement paid to the applicant for those months.
[Emphasis added.]
|
b) si
le revenu déclaré dépasse le revenu réel, le moins-perçu est versé au
demandeur.
[Je
souligne.]
|
[5]
Because
there was a difference between the “actual income” ($16,722) earned in 2005,
the reference year chosen by Mr. Grenier under section 14 of the Act, and the “shown
income” for Mr. Grenier ($11,892), an adjustment had to be made under
section 18 of the Act. As a result, an overpayment of $110 was calculated as
having been made to Mr. Grenier.
[6]
The trial
judge concluded that the Department had not made any mistake in doing so. We
also come to the same conclusion.
[7]
The appeal
will be dismissed with costs.
“Alice Desjardins”
Certified true
translation
Michael Palles
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-409-07
APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE PIERRE ARCHAMBAULT DATED AUGUST 27, 2007, DOCKET NO. 2007-1631
(OAS).
STYLE OF CAUSE: CLAUDE
GRENIER v. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: April 7, 2008
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DESJARDINS J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON
J.A.
DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: DESJARDINS J.A.
APPEARANCES:
|
Claude Grenier
Saint-Félix-de-Kinsey, Quebec
|
FOR THE APPELLANT
(for himself)
|
|
Marie-Claude
Landry
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
SOLICITOR OF RECORD:
|
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT
|
Email this Content