Summary of Issue: Applicability

Decision 14544 Full Text of Decision 14544

The jurisprudence has established that if claimant has not received cards he should make enquiries as to why not forthwith. The fact that he was disputing a disqualification and was in communication with the Commission regularly about this does not excuse his failure.

Decision 12982 Full Text of Decision 12982

She was under the impression that she did not have to return her report cards while under disqualification for 6 weeks. Clear and unfortunate case of error of law for the forms given her clearly instructed her otherwise.

Decision A-0757.85 Full Text of Decision A-0757.85

I agree with the Umpire that the legislation does not require that a claim for benefit be made for a week for which an applicant has been disqualified or disentitled. Whether it is required to file weekly claims for weeks where benefit is otherwise payable. Not a requirement that can be found in or read into ss. 30(1), 40(1) or s. 41. It will thus be necessary for claimant to satisfy the Commission at some point that he was eligible.

Decision 11098 Full Text of Decision 11098

Refer to: A-0757.85

Decision A0597.05 Full Text of Decision A0597.05

The question is whether there is a requirement to make a claim for benefit during the waiting period. The Court was of the view that its decision in Kachman (A-757-85) dealing with disqualifications also covers cases of disentitlement, including non-entitlement during the waiting period. The Court said that the definition of "disentitlement" at section 6 of the EI Act covers the waiting period. (The Commission has issued guidance on this case).

Decision 25520A Full Text of Decision 25520A

It is a case of a claimant failing to return his report card with respect to his waiting period because he immediately thereafter became employed and was thus not entitled to receive a benefit. It is not unreasonable or imprudent for a person in that situation to do what he did. Good cause shown. A claimant is not required to file a report card for a week in which he is disqualified or disentitled (KACHMAN). By the same token he should not be required to promptly file a report card with respect to the 2-week waiting period when, as here, he becomes employed immediately following that period.

Decision 16827 Full Text of Decision 16827

Claimant laid off 1 week in 7-87. He made a claim but did not complete a report card. Laid off again in 1-88. The test is what a reasonable prudent person would have done. Not reasonable to expect one to start enquiries as to why no card received for anisolated week not payable.

Decision A-1191.88 Full Text of Decision A-1191.88

He had not made his claim in 12-85 as it was his intention to do when he attended the office. The mere intention to do something can, in no circumstances, be equated to the doing of the thing. If the law clearly requires the doing of an act, the intention to do it is not enough.

Decision 14841B Full Text of Decision 14841B

It is not merely a procedural requirement but, as has been frequently pointed out, the Commission requires these cards at regular intervals to determine whether conditions of entitlement continue to exist.

Decision 15943 Full Text of Decision 15943

Under ss.40(1), a claimant is required to file a weekly claim for benefits. This is administered by the Commission in the form of weekly report cards that are submitted by the claimant bi-weekly.

Decision 13584 Full Text of Decision 13584

Refer to: A-0312.87

Decision A-0312.87 Full Text of Decision A-0312.87

Delayed 2 months after forwarding ROE to establish a benefit period. As per Umpire, there is nothing in the legislation which obliges the Commission to contact a claimant who has not returned his completed report cards. Upheld by FC.

Decision 11364 Full Text of Decision 11364

Submission of a claim is an essential condition of entitlement to benefits, and determines the date from which entitlement begins to run. Continuing claim to be supported by filing a bi-weekly report card.

Decision 11222 Full Text of Decision 11222

Delays in filing are not an uncommon occurrence. The UI Act and Regulations provide for time limits on filing of claims and it is incumbent upon claimants to take such steps as are necessary to make sure they are conforming to the requirements.

Decision A-0763.82 Full Text of Decision A-0763.82

Claimant disentitled under s.41 and reg. 34 because she did not return report cards. The Umpire said that nothing in the Act refers to report cards, the Commission could not technically disentitle on this basis; case allowed on a technicality. The Courtfound no error in law.