Jennifer Brown

The applicant filed a Request for Review of a previous Tribunal decision regarding her pension benefits.

She argued that she was entitled to immediate vesting and a transfer of her deferred pension to a locked-in RRSP based on the terms of the pension plan and subsequent amendments to the Pension Benefits Act.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, finding that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for review.

The Tribunal held that the applicant was attempting to reargue the case and that her new arguments regarding immediate vesting failed because she did not meet the statutory requirement of 24 months of continuous membership, and the legislative amendments were not retroactive.

The applicant challenged the calculation and transfer of her defined contribution pension account following the termination of her employment.

She argued her employment ended on the date of her termination meeting, making subsequent pension deductions unauthorized, and that her funds should have been transferred to a locked-in RRSP.

The Tribunal found that her employment continued through her statutory notice period, making the deductions valid.

Furthermore, because she had less than two years of plan membership, the Pension Benefits Act and the plan text did not require the funds to be transferred to a locked-in account.

The application was dismissed without costs.

The Superintendent of Financial Services proposed to revoke the applicant's mortgage brokerage licence and impose a $3,000 administrative penalty for failing to maintain errors and omissions insurance for a second time.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal, arguing it believed its licence had been surrendered and thus insurance was not required.

The Tribunal found the applicant's belief that the licence was surrendered was genuine and reasonable, meaning the failure to maintain insurance was not intentional, reckless, or negligent.

The Tribunal reduced the administrative penalty to $1,000 and ordered a six-month licence suspension instead of revocation.

The applicant requested a hearing regarding the Superintendent of Financial Services' Notice of Intended Decision to partially wind up the Mine Safety Appliances Company Canadian Pension Plan.

On consent of the parties, the Financial Services Tribunal ordered the Superintendent to issue the partial wind up order, with an effective date of August 1, 2000, and excluding four specific individuals.

The Tribunal further ordered the applicant to file an updated partial wind up report for approval and to fully fund the partial wind up.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal after the Superintendent proposed to refuse his application for a mortgage agent's licence.

The refusal was based on the applicant's past criminal conviction for drug trafficking, alleged false statements, and an allegedly misleading LinkedIn profile.

The Tribunal found that the applicant did not make false statements and did not contravene the Act regarding the LinkedIn profile.

Applying the Henderson factors, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant's past conduct, which stemmed from a drug addiction that he had since addressed, did not render him unsuitable for licensing.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to issue the licence subject to conditions, including supervision by a licensed broker.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the applicant's mortgage brokerage licence and impose a $3,000 administrative monetary penalty for failing to maintain errors and omissions insurance on two separate occasions.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the applicant contravened the Act by failing to maintain the required insurance, that the failure was intentional and negligent, and that the applicant demonstrated ungovernability.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to carry out the proposal to revoke the licence and impose the $3,000 penalty.

The applicant sought an early retirement pension from the Rio Tinto Alcan pension plan.

He had left Alcan in 1999 when his division was sold to Eaglebrook, and later became an employee of Kemira when Eaglebrook sold the business.

Alcan refused the pension application, arguing that under s. 80 of the Pension Benefits Act, the applicant was deemed to be continuously employed by a successor employer and could not collect a pension until he retired from Kemira.

The Financial Services Tribunal held that s. 80(3) did not bar the applicant from claiming his pension at age 55, as Alcan had explicitly agreed to this option at the time of the original sale in compliance with an order from the Régie des rentes du Québec.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to order Alcan to commence payment of the pension.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to impose an administrative monetary penalty of $1,500 on the applicant mortgage brokerage for failing to maintain errors and omissions insurance for a seven-month period.

The applicant requested a hearing, arguing it was inactive and intended to suspend its licence.

The Financial Services Tribunal found that the brokerage contravened the Act, as the insurance requirement attaches to the licence regardless of business activity.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to carry out the proposal to impose the $1,500 penalty.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to impose an administrative monetary penalty of $3,000 on the applicant mortgage brokerage for failing to maintain errors and omissions insurance for a period of five and a half months.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal, arguing that the penalty should be waived or reduced to the equivalent of the unpaid premiums.

The Tribunal upheld the $3,000 penalty, finding that the applicant's failure to maintain insurance was intentional and reckless, that it was a repeat offence, and that the penalty was appropriate to promote compliance and remove economic benefit.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Proposal to revoke the applicant's mortgage brokerage licence and impose administrative monetary penalties for failing to maintain errors and omissions insurance and failing to respond to requests for information.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal.

The Tribunal found that the contraventions were established.

It ordered the imposition of administrative penalties totalling $2,000 ($1,500 for the insurance contravention and $500 for the failure to respond).

The Tribunal declined to order the revocation of the licence, noting the applicant had applied to surrender it, but ordered the licence suspended until the surrender was accepted.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued a Notice of Intended Decision to partially wind up the Imperial Oil Limited Retirement Plan following the relocation of the applicant's head office.

The applicant reached settlements with all affected members except the respondent, who sought a partial wind-up to receive enhanced pension benefits from the plan rather than a lump sum payment directly from the applicant.

The Tribunal declined to exercise its discretion to order a partial wind-up, finding that the applicant's irrevocable offer of a lump sum payment provided the respondent with the equivalent value of any additional benefits she would have received upon a partial wind-up.