7 total
Request for review of pension decision dismissed as applicant failed to present new evidence or arguments.
The self-represented applicant filed a Request for Review of a Financial Services Tribunal decision regarding the University of Toronto Pension Plan.
Although the applicant missed the filing deadline by a few hours, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to extend the time for filing.
However, the Tribunal dismissed the Request for Review on the merits, finding that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for review.
The applicant merely attempted to reargue issues already decided and did not present any new evidence or arguments that were not reasonably available at the time of the original hearing.
Human rights application held in abeyance pending determination of lead case on delay.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that the survivorship benefit provisions of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan discriminate on the basis of sex and marital status.
The respondent Board sought early dismissal of this and 82 other similar applications for delay.
The applicant brought a Request for an Order During Proceedings asking that the application be held in abeyance pending the Tribunal's determination of a lead case on the issue of delay.
The respondents did not object.
The Tribunal ordered the application held in abeyance pending the determination of the lead case.
Application held in abeyance pending determination of delay issue in lead case.
The applicant filed an application alleging that the survivorship benefit provisions of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan discriminate on the basis of sex and marital status.
The applicant also filed a Request for an Order During Proceedings asking that the application be held in abeyance pending the Tribunal's determination of the delay issue in a lead case raising the same issues.
The respondent did not object.
The Tribunal ordered the application held in abeyance.
Human rights application regarding pension survivorship benefits held in abeyance pending lead case on delay.
The applicant requested that the application be held in abeyance pending the Tribunal's determination of a delay issue in a lead case raising the same issues.
The Tribunal granted the request and ordered the application held in abeyance.
Pre-retirement pension death benefits may be validly assigned to a former spouse via a separation agreement.
The appellant pension board appealed a Divisional Court decision that a deceased member's former spouse was entitled to a portion of his pre-retirement death benefits pursuant to a separation agreement.
The Court of Appeal held that pension benefits, including pre-retirement death benefits, may be transferred under a domestic contract without the aid of s. 48(13) of the Pension Benefits Act.
The court also determined that the 50 per cent limit on transfers under s. 51(2) applied to the pre-1987 benefits, and that the calculation date for the benefits was the date of the member's death.
The appeal was dismissed and the cross-appeal was allowed in part.
Union's unfair labour practice complaint alleging bad faith bargaining by the employer dismissed.
The applicant union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging that the responding party employer breached its duty to bargain in good faith under section 17 of the Labour Relations Act.
The union contended that the bargaining process for the most recent collective agreement was tainted by bad faith and material misrepresentation.
Following a lengthy hearing, the majority of the Board found no breach of the Act and dismissed the complaint, with one Board Member dissenting.
The Board issued a bottom-line decision to allow the parties to proceed with their collective bargaining relationship, with reasons to follow.
Pre-pleading production order against a non-party regulatory agency denied as premature and inappropriate.
The responding company in an unfair labour practice complaint brought a motion for a pre-pleading production order against the Pension Commission of Ontario, a non-party.
The company sought access to records and submissions to assist in preparing its response to the complaint.
The Board dismissed the motion, holding that pre-pleading production from a non-party is inappropriate and amounts to a fishing expedition.
The Board also vacated two summonses issued to a Commission official, finding them defective and premature.
