Summary of Issue: Sickness Defined

Decision 64240 Full Text of Decision 64240

A medical doctor gave a statement to certify that the claimant needed to be off work to take care of his wife because she was expecting twins and was unable to do any physical work. The judge stated that proof of inability to work is for the purpose of showing that the claimant himself is unable to work and not for the purpose of satisfying an obligation to care for a family member.

Decision 25001 Full Text of Decision 25001

Refer to: A-0479.94

Decision A-0479.94 Full Text of Decision A-0479.94

To read par.14(b) of the Act so as to include the sickness of one's dependant child conflicts with a plain reading of the provision and with Reg.47. Par.14(b) should only come into play where a claimant's own illness renders him or her incapable of work.

Decision 16041 Full Text of Decision 16041

Illness in 14(b) does not include illness of a child which prevents a parent from working. BOWNESS applies. No discrimination based on sex whether or not it is normally the female who has to look after a sick relative. Charter not offended.

Decision A-0117.79 Full Text of Decision A-0117.79

As per Umpire, the illness referred to in reg. 160(6), now 47(6), includes the illness of a child that renders a mother incapable of work. Judgment set aside by the Court. Reg. 160(6) refers solely to an illness suffered by a claimant.