OFST 2000

The Applicant requested a hearing regarding the Superintendent of Financial Services' proposal to refuse consent for the withdrawal of locked-in pension funds based on financial hardship.

The Applicant sought to withdraw funds from an active registered pension plan.

The Financial Services Tribunal affirmed the Superintendent's refusal, finding that subsection 67(5) of the Pension Benefits Act only permits unlocking of prescribed retirement savings arrangements, which does not include an active registered pension plan.

The employer requested a hearing regarding a Notice of Proposal by the Superintendent related to a partial wind-up report of its pension plan.

Shortly before the scheduled hearing, the employer withdrew its request.

The union, which had been granted party status, applied for an award of costs against the employer.

The Financial Services Tribunal dismissed the application, finding that the employer's conduct was not unreasonable, frivolous, or vexatious, and that the delay caused by the change of position was not unnecessary or unreasonable.

The applicant employer sought a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal regarding the Superintendent's proposal to refuse approval of a partial wind-up report for a pension plan.

The report failed to provide for special early retirement pensions under section 7.3 of the plan.

The Tribunal found that the special early retirement pension was an 'ancillary benefit' under the Pension Benefits Act, and that the employer's consent required by the plan was deemed to be given upon partial wind-up pursuant to subsection 74(7) of the Act.

The Tribunal directed the Superintendent to carry out the proposal to refuse approval of the report.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued an interim cease and desist order against the applicants for advertising illegal insurance products on their website.

The applicants requested a hearing to challenge the requirement that the corrective website notice specifically name the unlicensed entities involved.

The Financial Services Tribunal upheld the Superintendent's requirement to include the specific names, but modified the notice wording on consent to clarify that the warning was based on advice from the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.

The Superintendent of Financial Services issued an interim cease and desist order against Executive Barter Exchange Inc. and its principals for promoting insurance products of unlicensed insurers.

The respondents requested a hearing but subsequently agreed to a consent order.

The Financial Services Tribunal ordered the respondents to immediately cease advertising unlicensed insurance, post a warning notice on their website, provide information regarding their insurance-related transactions to the Superintendent, and repay any insurance monies collected from the public.

The applicant requested a confidentiality order during a pre-hearing conference regarding information produced in response to interrogatories and document disclosure requests.

As none of the responding parties opposed the request, the Tribunal ordered that the produced information be kept confidential and not disclosed without further order or agreement.

The Tribunal also ordered that reasonable notice be given before filing or referencing the confidential information in future submissions.

The applicant brought a preliminary motion for an order directing the Superintendent of Financial Services to respond to interrogatories regarding the delay in processing a partial wind-up application for a pension plan.

The Superintendent refused to answer, arguing the reasons for delay were irrelevant.

The Financial Services Tribunal applied the Monsanto test and ordered the Superintendent to answer the interrogatories, finding that the issue of delay was arguably relevant as it had been included in the agreed Pre-Hearing Conference Memorandum.

The applicant requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal regarding his claim for an immediate pension benefit following the divestiture of his employment.

The respondent brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the request for a hearing on the basis that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction.

The Tribunal found that neither the Superintendent nor anyone with delegated authority had made a final decision regarding the applicant's claim.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded it did not have jurisdiction to proceed with the merits of the request and dismissed the application.

The applicant, a member of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, sought to transfer the commuted value of his pension upon termination of employment.

The applicant had become eligible for an immediate pension under the plan's early retirement window.

The Financial Services Tribunal dismissed the application, holding that under section 42(3) of the Pension Benefits Act and the terms of the plan, a member who is eligible for an immediate pension is not entitled to transfer the commuted value of their pension.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Director of Licensing and Enforcement suspending his level II life insurance licence for 60 days due to his failure to satisfy continuing education requirements and furnishing false information.

At the hearing, the appellant sought to introduce new evidence regarding his mental stress, which the Tribunal refused to admit as it did not meet the conditions for new evidence on appeal.

The Tribunal confirmed the Director's decision but varied the commencement date of the suspension to avoid undue prejudice to the appellant's clientele during the RRSP season.