Summary of Issue: Recourse

Decision 24609 Full Text of Decision 24609

In matters relating to write-offs the discretion rests with the Commission (see CORNISH-HARDY). Thus, it is not left up to the Umpire to examine a claimant's financial statements in order to determine whether or not a write-off is warranted.

Decision 23378 Full Text of Decision 23378

For claimants to challenge a wrongful exercise of discretion by the Commission, they would have to bring a s. 18 application to the Federal Court Trial Division, an expensive and time consuming procedure which essentially denies individuals any viable recourse to challenge a misuse of discretion.

Decision 15929 Full Text of Decision 15929

The exercise of the CEIC's discretion under reg.60 is reviewable by the appropriate court but not by Board or Umpire. See CORNISH-HARDY. The Board exceeded its jurisdiction by limiting the amount of claimant's liability under s.49.

Decision A-0647.78 Full Text of Decision A-0647.78

Section 79 (now section 114) of the Act confers a right of appeal on "claimant" as defined aggrieved by a decision of the Commission on a claim or reconsideration under section 43 (now section 52) of the EIA. Paragraph 44(i) (now 54(k)) was not intented to authorize and Regulation 175 (now 56) do not provide for appeals against the Commission's refusal to write-off an overpayment.