Summary of Issue: Proof


Decision A0179.13 Full Text of Decision A0179.13

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

The claimant applied for EI sickness benefits. The Commission denied his claim as he was unable to provide a medical certificate. The Commission advised the claimant that he may qualify for regular EI benefits should he be willing to look for other employment, but the claimant refused to do so. The BOR dismissed the appeal, finding that the claimant had not established that he was unable to work due to his illness. The BOR also found that the claimant was not entitled to regular EI benefits, because he had not proven that he was available for work. The Umpire dismissed the claimant’s appeal. The FCA concluded that the claimant was not prepared to look for and accept other employment and, therefore, would not qualify for regular EI benefits.

other summary
Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
availability for work Capable of work

Decision 63860 Full Text of Decision 63860

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

The only medical report the claimant provided stated that he was fit to return to work. The claimant had not provided medical evidence that would satisfy the requirement of subsection 40(1) of the Regulations as the note submitted did not attest to the claimant's inability to work nor did it provide the probable duration of the illness as required.


Decision 18783 Full Text of Decision 18783

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

CUB 14852 quoted. The Commission said that both medical certificates were insufficient since they contained no diagnoses. There is no legal basis for rejecting the certificates on that ground. They indicated she suffered from a continuing health condition affecting her capacity.


Decision 16098 Full Text of Decision 16098

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

I am reluctant to accept Board's decision because it relied exclusively on the opinions of the CEIC's physician who never had occasion to view claimant's medical records nor did he conduct a personal examination. One should accept evidence of treating physician instead.


Decision 15221 Full Text of Decision 15221

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

Claimant had surgery on her feet in Jan. Last visit to doctor 3 weeks after and may return to work May 5. Her work required her to be constantly on her feet. Feels unable to work after May 5. Did not consult any doctor since last visit.


Decision 14852 Full Text of Decision 14852

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

Claimant put off sick by employer: mental fitness to work doubted. Psychiatric's note not accepted by Commission: no diagnosis. No express statutory requirement in reg. 47(1) requiring diagnosis. Not proper either to request note from claimant's generalpractitioner in this case.

other summary
Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees right to be heard improper hearing

Decision 13649 Full Text of Decision 13649

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

Up to insured to provide proof he was not capable of working. Not up to CEIC staff to give details of type of proof required or to decide, at time the claim is made, whether the proof filed is sufficient.

other summary
Other Issue(s): Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees issue not recognized second notice found valid

Decision 13027 Full Text of Decision 13027

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

The burden of proving one's incapability to work is clearly on the claimant. Opinion of the independent medical examiner accepted by Board.


Decision 10826B Full Text of Decision 10826B

summary
Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
sickness benefits proof
Summary:

Not only did claimant fail to produce medical evidence in support of her original claim that she was incapable, but her own subsequent evidence was that she had not been incapacitated.

Date modified: