Hello - I was recently approved to appeal the SST decision. They keep telling me I cannot submit new evidence. It is my understanding from the cases of Law I have read that if the evidence was not Discoverable and is Material it can be admitted… or perhaps I could get a ruling from them on it. It is an MRI that proves that the CT scan they have from within the MQP time (already saying my condition is severe) is pressing on my spinal cord. A Neurologist immediately called me on getting it and made a next day appt. with a Neurosurgeon who wants to operate, soon. I have basically proven with this that I am in SEVERE pain. Yet they say not admissable.even after I sent them this:
1.) As per Belos v. MHRD, 2011:
…the proper legal test to be applied to “new facts” applications under subsection 84(2) of the Plan. Under this legal test, applicants must show two things:
(1) Non-discoverability. The information must not have been discoverable, with reasonable diligence, at the time of the earlier matter.
(2) Materiality. The information must be material in the sense that it could reasonably be expected to have affected the outcomeuou of the earlier matter.
(See Gaudet v. Canada (Attorney General), 2010 FCA 59 at paragraph 3; Kent v. Canada(Attorney General), 2004 FCA 420 at paragraph 34.)
I am stumped. I sent articles from newspapers on the wait times for MRIs in BC, two plus years for awhile… and they directly in the SST decision said that I did not have spinal compression… this proves I do… it is MATERIAL.
Does anyone have any suggestions. I would consider spending some of my last monies on a lawyer and may start calling tomorrow. (my US disability - I worked down there - went right through and I got a nice back pay cheque… almost gone and so will be the house). You have to be a lawyer in Canada and I am an architect… why the terrible neck… over drafting boards for long hours… but God I loved it.
I have until SEPTEMBER 21st now to get in any final arguments.
Thanks for any help.