Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Judicial review challenged CRA’s denial of COVID-19 benefits based on 2019 income.

• The applicant submitted foreign tax documents from China as income proof.

• CRA disregarded the Chinese tax certificate without proper justification.

• Canadian tax return showed over $35,000 in declared income for 2019.

• CRA required paystubs or employment records, which were unavailable due to foreign context.

• The court found the CRA's decision unreasonable and lacking proper engagement with submitted evidence.

Facts and outcome of the case

Adam Fulton DeBrouwere applied for the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB), a pandemic-era financial support program. His application was denied by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) on the basis that he did not meet the minimum income eligibility requirement of $5,000 in 2019. DeBrouwere, who had worked as an English teacher in China during that year, provided evidence to CRA including his Canadian tax return indicating approximately $35,000 in income and a certificate from Chinese tax authorities confirming his employment income. However, he was unable to provide Chinese bank records or employer-issued paystubs, as his former employer had ceased operations.

The CRA officer reviewing the case dismissed the foreign tax certificate and instead focused on the absence of standard employment documentation such as paystubs or a Record of Employment. The CRA’s internal guidelines allow for other forms of documentation to establish income eligibility, but the officer gave no explanation for why the Chinese tax document was insufficient.

The Federal Court, presided over by Justice Sébastien Grammond, ruled that the CRA’s decision was unreasonable. The Court emphasized that the officer failed to engage with the applicant’s documentary evidence, particularly the tax certificate issued by Chinese authorities, and ignored the applicant's Canadian tax return that demonstrated a substantial income and resulting tax liability. These were not minor discrepancies but substantive pieces of evidence in favor of the applicant.

As a result, the Court granted DeBrouwere’s application for judicial review. It quashed the CRA’s original decision from May 8, 2024, and ordered the matter to be reconsidered by a different CRA officer. The Court did not award costs to either party. The outcome represents a successful challenge by a self-represented litigant and underscores the importance of reasoned decision-making by administrative bodies when reviewing non-standard forms of evidence, especially from foreign jurisdictions.