Decision 68638
Full Text of Decision 68638
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The claimant's contests the denial of funding which is tantamount to saying that refusal to approve the application for referral is the underlying issue. Section 25 bars appeals from the Commission's refusal to approve referral and funding.
Decision 38850
Full Text of Decision 38850
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
By virtue of subsection 26(8), the decision of the Commission refusing to refer the claimant to the course or program that he was pursuing at the relevant time is not appealable.
Decision A-0372.96
Full Text of Decision A-0372.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
FCA found that the Commission’s decision as to whether or not to refer a claimant to a course covered by ss. 26(1) of the Act cannot be appealed under ss. 26(8). Consequently, neither the BOR, the Umpire, nor this Court has the jurisdiction to hear a challenge of the Commission’s decision on the grounds that the claimant was a victim of discrimination within the meaning of s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He should have applied to another forum.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Decision 28274
Full Text of Decision 28274
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The present appeal is dismissed on the ground that by virtue of ss. 26(8) of the Act, no decision referring or refusing to refer a claimant to a course or program mentioned in ss. 26(1) is subject to appeal under s. 79 or 80 of the Act.
Decision 25360
Full Text of Decision 25360
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0576.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
error of Commission staff |
|
Decision A-0576.94
Full Text of Decision A-0576.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
Because claimant had been given the wrong form by CEIC staff, he was referred to the course in 10-93 rather than 8-93. Held by Umpire that GRANGER is no authority to deny benefit in this case and that ss.26(8) does not prevent the Umpire from allowing the appeal. No reviewable error by Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
error of Commission staff |
|
Decision 23396
Full Text of Decision 23396
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
Board exceeded its jurisdiction when it ruled on the Commission's decision not to refer the claimant to a course of study. Subsection 26(8) of the Act clearly indicates that this decision may not be appealed to the Board of Referees or to the Umpire.
Claimant may challenge such a decision, either by filing a complaint with the Canadian Human Right Commission, or by instituting proceedings in the Federal Court of Canada in order to obtain a declaration that her rights as guaranteed by the Charter were violated.
Decision 22141
Full Text of Decision 22141
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
Ss.26(8) quoted. It follows from the foregoing that the decision of the Commission not to approve the course followed by the claimant is not subject to appeal to the Board of Referees nor to an Umpire.
Decision 20197
Full Text of Decision 20197
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
It is not unusual for Umpires to be faced with the genuine assertion that others in comparable circumstances have received benefits. However, the discretion to approve a claimant for feepayer status is entrusted to the Commission. Umpires cannot substitute their own discretion.
I should add, however, that if the claimant feels that the Commission's approval of other claimants was unfair to him, he could pursue the matter by way of judicial review under s.18 of the Federal Court Act.
Decision 17390A
Full Text of Decision 17390A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law when it held that the CEIC decision not to refer N.S. residents was wrong. It lacked the jurisdiction to make that determination, there being no proof of abuse of administrative discretion or bad faith by those officers authorizedto make that decision.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 17578
Full Text of Decision 17578
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The Umpire cannot alter the decision of the Commission to refuse a course referral.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
purpose of the legislation |
|
Decision 16133
Full Text of Decision 16133
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law by considering the claimant to have been referred to a course by CEIC. It cannot substitute itself to CEIC to exercise the Commission's sole discretion.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 12670
Full Text of Decision 12670
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law and in fact. It has no authority to designate a course as an approved one under ss.26(1).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 11559
Full Text of Decision 11559
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
Here, conditional or not, the referral was refused. However, claimant continued to receive benefits. An Umpire cannot alter the judgment call of the Commission not to approve the referral.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Decision 11074
Full Text of Decision 11074
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Summary:
As to whether claimant should have been referred, the Commission never made any decision. While there may be some question as to whether such decision could be appealed, none was taken and no decision to appeal.
Decision 25966
Full Text of Decision 25966
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0692.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
benefit period extended |
|
|
Decision A-0692.94
Full Text of Decision A-0692.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Summary:
The umpire concluded that the approval given could not be limited to one subject only. Judgment reversed by the Federal Court of Appeal: subsection 26(2) only applies to a course that is taken after a benefit period but to which the claimant was referred and which begins before the expiry of the claim period.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
benefit period extended |
|
|
Decision 14023
Full Text of Decision 14023
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Summary:
Where there is evidence that a referral exists, that evidence cannot be refuted by a simple statement to the contrary. He was given an agreement which he completed. It is clear that he was referred, even if done by error. No requirement in s.26 that course be purchased by CEIC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
factors to consider |
|
Decision 11726
Full Text of Decision 11726
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Summary:
Ss.26(1) makes no mention of the length of the course, and between fee-payers and others whose training places are purchased by the Commission. If in fact referred to the course, whatever be its length and whether or not he paid his own tuition, the section applies.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Decision 11559
Full Text of Decision 11559
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Summary:
If the Commission is issuing conditional referrals they should stop this practice. Ss.26(1) gives the Commission no authority to do so. CUB 11061 makes it quite clear.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Decision S-0070.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discretionary power |
|
Summary:
The Umpire erred in law. He directed his mind to a matter not under appeal before the Board nor before him, namely the correctness of the CEIC's decision not to refer claimant to another training course; a decision, in any event, not reviewable on appeal. Leave to appeal dismissed by SC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
question not at issue |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
benefit period extended |
imprisonment |
|
Decision A-0070.94
Full Text of Decision A-0070.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discretionary power |
|
Summary:
The Umpire erred in law. He directed his mind to a matter not under appeal before the Board nor before him, namely the correctness of the CEIC's decision not to refer claimant to another training course; a decision, in any event, not reviewable on appeal. Leave to appeal dismissed by SC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
question not at issue |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
benefit period extended |
imprisonment |
|
Decision 12048
Full Text of Decision 12048
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discretionary power |
|
Summary:
Attended course in 83-84 at request of CEIC; found employment in summer of 1984 and left in September to continue course, this time on own initiative; only CEIC may exercise power conferred by s. 26.
Decision A-0372.96
Full Text of Decision A-0372.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
FCA found that the Commission’s decision as to whether or not to refer a claimant to a course covered by ss. 26(1) of the Act cannot be appealed under ss. 26(8). Consequently, neither the BOR, the Umpire, nor this Court has the jurisdiction to hear a challenge of the Commission’s decision on the grounds that the claimant was a victim of discrimination within the meaning of s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He should have applied to another forum.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Decision 20309A
Full Text of Decision 20309A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
CEIC explained it had divided the Greater Montreal region in different administrative sub-regions; in the sub-regions where there was a demand for police officers, the insured women were steered towards the course; the others were not. Discretionary powers exercised judicially.
Decision 20309
Full Text of Decision 20309
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
Case referred back to the Board for consideration as to whether the Commission exercised its discretionary powers judicially, as required in CHARTIER. Students at the Institut de police de Nicolet (Quebec). They all came from the same area. Some were referred, others not.
Decision 20206
Full Text of Decision 20206
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
The claimant also argued that other students in his class were receiving benefits while in attendance at the course. Complaints of this nature, no matter how sincere, cannot be taken into account by a Board or an Umpire. The other cases may differ in important details.
Decision 17390A
Full Text of Decision 17390A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
Refusal by the Commission to refer N.S. residents to a police officer course while residents from adjacent provinces were so referred did not violate s.7 of the Charter. A pure economic right is outside the scope of protection under s.7.
In my view, the administration of a national program in consultation with provincial officials in a manner that takes account of differing provincial needs does not result in breach of ss.15(1) of the Charter.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 17462
Full Text of Decision 17462
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
The fact that claimant does not enjoy equal benefit of the law when compared with his classmates from other provinces and with black students from the same province does not offend s.6 and 15 of the Charter.
Decision 13814A
Full Text of Decision 13814A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
It is submitted that claimant's disentitlement amounts to discrimination under s.15 of Charter. I do not agree. He is being treated under the law in the same way as any other claimant who is attending a full-time course to which he has not been referred.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
delay due to representative |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
not binding for future |
|
Decision 14658A
Full Text of Decision 14658A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
Charter argument alluded to. Other claimants were referred. Neither an Umpire nor a Board may exercise the discretion found in 26(1). Although the course was previously approved, the Commission has apparently changed its policy.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
presumption |
|
Decision 17208
Full Text of Decision 17208
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
Charter argument: classmate, also an employed nurse, was referred to the same course. Classmate received UI not as a result of a correct interpretation of the law but as a result of an error made by Commission personnel. Claimant's appeal dismissed.
Decision 16920
Full Text of Decision 16920
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
The argument that there was discrimination according to the Charter of Rights since 5 members of a visible minority were sent on a course and that proportionally more Anglophones than Francophones were sent, was not accepted.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Decision 13997A
Full Text of Decision 13997A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
The Umpire requested information on alleged unequal treatment of claimants attending same course. Differences in treatment fully explained by the Commission and accepted by the Umpire. None of the claimants were referred but a few succeeded in proving their availability.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Decision 13997
Full Text of Decision 13997
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
What is most troublesome: the Commission is not applying the law to others in the same fashion and fee-payers are excused from a job search. This category has no statutory sanction and leads to arbitrary application of the law. Charter examined. Judgment reserved.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
applicability |
unable to obtain suitable work |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Decision 12251
Full Text of Decision 12251
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
S.15 of the Charter at issue. The claimant has not been denied any equality before and under the law, even though there is a clear distinction effected by the Commission between him and those who receive benefits while pursuing a course blessed by the Commission. [p. 5]
Decision 11979
Full Text of Decision 11979
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
He feels that it is discriminatory that he was not able to claim benefits when other people taking the course were getting them. Very serious charge of political interference. Two wrongs do not make a right and improper influence does not strengthen hisclaim.
Decision 10644
Full Text of Decision 10644
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Summary:
Claimant says that 2 fellow students at the same college collected UI for 2 years while he was only entitled to 44 weeks. Those 2 cases are not before me. If the Commission decided that they should be referred for 2 years, I have no right to question this decision.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
benefit period extended |
|
|
Decision 26374
Full Text of Decision 26374
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Benefit period ended 11-1-92. Course started 13-1-92. Claimant argued that an information session held on 7-1-92 was an integral part of the course. Even if the session was compulsory, there was evidence from the learning institution itself that it was not an integral part of the course.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
change of members |
|
Decision 25059
Full Text of Decision 25059
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
It is common ground that claimant's request for approval under s. 26 was granted by an officer of the Commission. However, this decision was reversed on review, one day after she had already started her course. Ss. 26(8) quoted. Since no discretion is allowed in the Act, I am bound by the legislation.
Decision 24961
Full Text of Decision 24961
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Referred course in 3 parts, all to be considered continuous despite a six-week interval, said the Board. Referral misinterpreted. It was limited to the Basic part. No mention of continuity is made. It could have been different if it had only mentioned the course name without reference to parts.
Decision 24177
Full Text of Decision 24177
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Claimant referred to a course by the Commission and was advised that since he had opted to do the coop method, a break in training between the first and second session would affect his UI benefit rate because the break was to be longer than 8 weeks.
Decision 20340
Full Text of Decision 20340
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Being on a course approved from 18-1-88 to 10-1-89 but not as of 11-1-89 because of failures. Question is whether CEIC had the right to draw up administrative regulations to monitor the result of the courses. It seems to me that the answer is yes, otherwise it could lead to abuse.
Decision 17986
Full Text of Decision 17986
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
He left his work on 20-1 to take a course only to find that he had not been formally directed to it yet and this was done 20-2. Certainly from 20-1 to 20-2 he must be considered as having done so of his own volition. No indication that the direction hadretroactive effect.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study approved |
|
Decision 16995
Full Text of Decision 16995
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Took course as fee-payer from 31-8 to 16-10-87 and referred afterwards. Under policy, one pays tuition fee and makes some general statement of availability. Course approved. Absurd to disentitle for very same course while fee-payer due to lack of documentation.
Decision A-1122.87
Full Text of Decision A-1122.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Referred by CEIC to a course to last until 14-6-85. The Board held that the real date of course termination was 11-6-86 and allowed an extension of the benefit period up to that date. Decision overturned by Umpire. Application for review dismissed by FC.
Decision 14323
Full Text of Decision 14323
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1122.87
Decision 14902
Full Text of Decision 14902
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Referred to a course from 9-84 to 6-85 and a second one from 19-8-85 to 1-11-85 (11 weeks); continues the same course on his own initiative and declared ineligible Monday 4-11-85. Discretionary power of CEIC both because of the nature of the course and its duration.
Decision 11324
Full Text of Decision 11324
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0825.85
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Decision A-0825.85
Full Text of Decision A-0825.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Took courses from 21-11-83 to 22-6-84 and from 17-9-84 to 8-2-85. Benefit period terminated 6 weeks after 22-6-84. As per Umpire, the Board erred in finding that the course terminated in 6-84. The Umpire could not quash the Board's finding of fact.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Decision 12090
Full Text of Decision 12090
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Referred to a course which was to be completed on 13-5. Failed to meet the course requirements by that date and continues on his own. Availability not shown subsequent to 13-5.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Decision 11790
Full Text of Decision 11790
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
The legal question is whether 26(1) permits the Commission to withdraw its initial approval. The factual aspect is whether the actual referral contained a commitment that the approval was for a fixed period of time or to a conclusion. Referral document necessary.
S.26(1) does not prevent from bringing the referral to a halt at some time. Neither does it contain a guarantee that a claimant once referred carry it through to conclusion.
Decision 11726
Full Text of Decision 11726
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Summary:
Ss.26(1) makes no mention of the length of the course, and between fee-payers and others whose training places are purchased by the Commission. If in fact referred to the course, whatever be its length and whether or not he paid his own tuition, the section applies.
Claimant was referred to a 52-week computer course. Several months after commencement, the course was cancelled and replaced by one of 64 weeks. S.26 was not applied after 52 weeks. Decision quashed. The length is inconsequential under s.26.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
definition |
|
Decision 34882
Full Text of Decision 34882
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
error of Commission staff |
|
Summary:
The Commission would be abusing his discretionary power if, after stating to a claimant that he is eligible for a training course and allowing him to follow the said course, it subsequently realized its mistake and demanded that the benefits received be repaid. Case on appeal before the FCA.**NOTE: It was decided to appeal at the FCA. The Commission's policy remains the same, no matter who is at fault, benefits paid in error must be reimbursed. The jurisprudence has always been constant to this effect.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
legal remedy |
|
Decision 25360
Full Text of Decision 25360
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
error of Commission staff |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0576.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Decision A-0576.94
Full Text of Decision A-0576.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
error of Commission staff |
|
Summary:
Because claimant had been given the wrong form by CEIC staff, he was referred to the course in 10-93 rather than 8-93. Held by Umpire that GRANGER is no authority to deny benefit in this case and that ss.26(8) does not prevent the Umpire from allowing the appeal. No reviewable error by Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
appeal |
|
Decision 16920
Full Text of Decision 16920
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
The fact that the insured person was chosen by the provincial authorities does not bind CEIC. Neither the Board nor the umpire have the power to oblige CEIC to send the person to take courses since this is a discretionary power.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Decision 13997A
Full Text of Decision 13997A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
A Commission minute designates Employment Counsellors as the sole authority to refer under s.26. If Counsellors are employees of the Commission, the Commission will want to consider whether, in designating itself, it has not exceeded the authority in s.26. No need to decide here.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Decision 13997
Full Text of Decision 13997
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
S.26 does not give the Commission itself the authority to refer. That authority is to be exercised by an entity designated by the Commission. Clarification sought from Commission about this. Judgment reserved.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
applicability |
unable to obtain suitable work |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
discrimination |
|
Decision 12090
Full Text of Decision 12090
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
Even if a claimant can show that he would have been referred to the course, he still has the responsibility of proving availability.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Decision A-0127.77
Full Text of Decision A-0127.77
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
Training allowance paid by EIC while taking a course. Claimant had to prove that he had been referred to the course by an authority designated under 26(1). The UIC brochure was not a designation which modified the effective designation.
Decision A-0787.76
Full Text of Decision A-0787.76
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
legal authority |
|
Summary:
To receive benefit of 26(1), it is not sufficient for the insured to attend a course and the Manpower Centre to pay her a training allowance; she must have been referred to the course by the designated authorities. Application for review dismissed by the FC.
