Summary of Issue: Benefit Of Doubt

Decision 76247 Full Text of Decision 76247

The claimant appeals from the determination given by a BOR, which allowed the employer's appeal from the Commission's decision that the acts of which the employer accused the claimant did not show misconduct on his part. The Commission had accepted the claim for benefits by the claimant. The employer suspended the claimant for 10 working days following a harassment complaint and an administrative investigation. The Commission asked the employer to provide information from the claimant’s file, as it could not make a finding of misconduct based merely on the allegation in the letter of suspension. The employer refused, saying that the case involved harassment. The employer also said that it would not disclose anything about its investigation into the facts and complaints. The claimant flatly denied the employer’s allegations, saying that he never harassed or bullied any other employees or directed foul language at them. The Commission gave the claimant the benefit of doubt, as the evidence was equally balanced on both sides (section 49 of the Employment Insurance Act). The appeal by the claimant is allowed by the Umpire.

Decision 69718 Full Text of Decision 69718

The Commission argued that the Board erred in fact and in law by cancelling the allocation of the earnings confirmed by the employer as having been paid to the claimant. With respect to the Board of Referees' reference to its obligation to give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant when the evidence is equally balanced on both sides, the Commission pointed out that such an obligation applies only to cases of misconduct or voluntary leaving in accordance with section 49(2) of the Employment Insurance Act.

Decision 68111 Full Text of Decision 68111

The Board reviewed the evidence and came to the conclusion that the claimant's and the employer's evidence was equally credible and, as per subsection 49(2) of the EI Act, gave the claimant the benefit of the doubt.

Decision 67552 Full Text of Decision 67552

The Board erred in law in deciding to give the claimant the benefit of the doubt pursuant to subsection 49(2) of the Act. There were no serious contradictions between the employer's version and that of the claimant. The claimant did not dispute having received a suspension for lateness.