| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
Summary:
The claimant requested a write off of his overpayment. The Commission refused, using the notion of "privation injustifiable" [undue hardship]. The Umpire emphasized that this is considered equivalent to "préjudice abusif" [undue hardship], as concluded by Justice Tremblay Lamer in Côté. The structure of section 56 of the Regulations provides an opening for the Commission to exercise its discretionary powers to write off an overpayment only when the existence of a prior condition, in this case, undue hardship (préjudice abusive in the French version), has been demonstrated. He concluded that by exercising its discretion, the Commission does not have to consider the claimant's good faith, the causes of the overpayment, and the recommendation of the Board of Referees.
