Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Judicial review focused on whether the Canada Revenue Agency’s denial of COVID-19 benefits was reasonable and procedurally fair.

• Dispute centered on whether caregiver benefits qualified as eligible income for the $5,000 threshold required for CERB and CRCB.

• The applicant argued that benefit eligibility guidelines changed and that her caregiver benefits should count toward the income requirement.

• The court examined whether the applicant was given a fair opportunity to present her case and whether the CRA agent properly explained eligibility requirements.

• Statutory interpretation of the Canada Recovery Benefits Act and the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act was central to determining eligibility.

• No new evidence outside the original administrative record was admitted, as it did not meet the legal exceptions.

Facts and outcome of the case

Background and facts

The applicant sought judicial review of two decisions by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) that denied her eligibility for the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit (CRCB). The CRA determined that she did not meet the $5,000 eligible income threshold and had not stopped working for reasons related to COVID-19. The applicant, who was self-represented, argued that she received over $7,000 in caregiver benefits, which she believed should be counted as eligible income. She also claimed that the eligibility guidelines for COVID-19 benefits changed repeatedly and that she was not treated fairly by the CRA agent during the review process.

The applicant stopped working in 2019 to care for her grandfather and subsequently received caregiver benefits described as “Compassionate Care Benefits” under the Employment Insurance Act. She submitted that these benefits should have been included in the calculation of her eligible income for CERB and CRCB. The CRA, however, concluded that only certain types of employment insurance income—specifically maternity and parental benefits—qualified as eligible income under the relevant statutes.

Legal analysis and court’s reasoning

The court’s review was limited to assessing whether the CRA’s decisions were reasonable and whether the applicant was afforded procedural fairness. The court found that the statutory framework clearly excluded the caregiver benefits received by the applicant from the types of income that could be used to meet the $5,000 threshold. The court also determined that the applicant had not stopped working or reduced her hours due to COVID-19, as she had ceased employment in 2019 for unrelated reasons.

On the issue of procedural fairness, the court found that the applicant was informed of the eligibility requirements and was given an opportunity to present her case and provide additional information. The court also addressed the applicant’s attempt to introduce new evidence, ruling that only the record before the original decision-maker could be considered unless specific legal exceptions applied, which were not met in this case.

Outcome and costs

The court concluded that the CRA’s decisions were reasonable and justified in law. The application for judicial review was dismissed. The respondent, Attorney General of Canada, did not seek costs, and the court made no order as to costs. No damages were awarded.