VETERANS |
Gagné v. Canada (Attorney General)
T-1922-01
2002 FCT 711, Tremblay-Lamer J.
25/6/02
13 pp.
Application for judicial review of Veterans Review and Appeal Board (VRAB) decision dated July 4, 2001, refusing to reconsider decision dated June 27, 2000, finding applicant not entitled to receive pension as surviving spouse of veteran--Decision originally made by Minister, affirmed by review panel of VRAB, then by appeal panel of VRAB--Applicant advised under VRAB's new policy applicant would be restricted, when applying for reconsideration, to presenting written arguments and if application were granted, applicant would then have opportunity to present oral arguments, as she wished to do--Despite applicant's repeated requests to present oral arguments, appeal panel made preliminary examination without giving applicant opportunity to make oral arguments, and decided no reason to reconsider decision--Application allowed-- Issue being question of law (whether term "in any proceeding" found in Regulations, s. 3, allowing personal appearance by applicant, involves first step of application for reconsideration), applicable standard of review that of correctness of decision--Application of interpretation approach known as modern or teleological, codified in Interpretation Act, s. 12, to "proceeding" which is not defined in Act or Regulations--Therefore, should adopt large and liberal interpretation, consistent with intention of Parliament (Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, s. 3)--In light of foregoing, must conclude Parliament intended to include "screening process" prescribed by Board in connection with application for reconsideration--Board therefore erred in law by denying applicant opportunity to present her arguments in accordance with broad interpretation required by Regulations, s. 3--Veterans Review and Appeal Board Act, S.C. 1995, c. 18, s. 3--Veterans Review and Appeal Board Regulations, SOR/96-67, s. 3--Interpretation Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-21, s. 12.