The Tribunal found that the applicant was not unable to act because he had not understood that he owed money to the respondent. On the contrary, he had understood this very well since he had met his socioeconomic assistance agent. Rather, it was the agent who did not help him to formulate correctly his application for review:

[Translation] “In this file, even though the socio-economic assistance agent understood very well the applicant’s intention to challenge the claim, she lent him no help whatsoever in formulating his application for review. She had him sign a declaration explaining the use of a sum of money, and she asked him to provide other documents. While the applicant was taking those steps, the period for the filing of the application to review was running, and when the applicant acted, that period was expired.

In addition to the difficulties of those two individuals, the passivity of the socioeconomic assistance agent left the applicant with the belief that the collection of new documents had no consequences:

The Tribunal is not suggesting that the socioeconomic assistance agent wilfully left the applicant in error and, thus, let the 90 days delay expire.

But in failing to act in conformity with the provisions of section 131 of the Act, and thus failing to explain precisely to the applicant his obligation to file his application for review within the prescribed time period, the agent put the latter in a situation where it was impossible for him to act earlier.” (Paragraphs 19 to 22.)

• M.K. v. The Minister for Social solidarity and family, [2004] T.A.Q. File No. SAS-M-077604-0207 (19 August 2002) The applicant disputes the respondent’s decision to refuse to pay her some employment insurance benefits as a single adult family, because she was living within a common-law relationship.
  
  The applicant did not speak or understand French or English. During the hearing, problems arose because of the absence of an interpreter.
  
  The Tribunal is bound to ensure it can communicate with the applicant. Thus the hearing was adjourned until the Tribunal was able to find an interpreter between the Punjabi and French languages.