Summary of Issue: Delay Due To Representative

Decision 41239 Full Text of Decision 41239

Umpire ruled that when claimant's counsel files an appeal, but for administrative reasons the Notice of appeal is either not delivered by a third party - in this case Canada Post- or reaches and is lost at the Commission's premises which is another possibility not discounted in this case, that the law cannot be so vigorously enforced as to deny a person the right to claim special reasons under the Act. Such reasons are not in the control of the claimant or even the Commission and should not adversly affect the claimant.

Decision 37132 Full Text of Decision 37132

Claimant intended to appeal from the day he received the BOR's decision.Claimant delayed filing appeal awaiting advice of his M.P.. Acted immediately upon advice. Umpire is satisfied that the claimant acted in good faith and allowed the appeal.

Decision 27381 Full Text of Decision 27381

While absence of prejudice may also be a factor, I think it important to require that a claimant act in a prudent and well-intentioned manner, displaying a desire to pursue the matter. The claimant must accept the failure of his or her agent to act likewise. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Decision 26864 Full Text of Decision 26864

An extension of time will be granted only when the whole of the delay period can be justified by reference to factors which are outside the control of the claimant. Blind reliance on third parties does not always provide such a justification. The appeal procedure is simple.

Decision A-0064.94 Full Text of Decision A-0064.94

Claimant had referred his case to his lawyer who overlooked the matter. The Umpire held that this was a reasonable explanation for a 3-week delay. No basis for finding that the Board exercised its discretion improperly in upholding the CEIC. No justification for Umpire to substitute his own view.

Decision 23902 Full Text of Decision 23902

Refer to: A-0064.94

Decision 20793 Full Text of Decision 20793

Refer to: A-0373.92

Decision A-0373.92 Full Text of Decision A-0373.92

The Umpire refused to extend the time since the reason for delay (waiting to hear concerning representations made by M.P. to Minister) was not a proper and justifiable reason. Such a decision falls within the Umpire's discretion and can only be reversed where that discretion is exercised improperly.

Decision 20574 Full Text of Decision 20574

It may no doubt be tempting to call upon one's member of Parliament and have him intervene to short-circuit the appeal mechanism. But this is not the role of a member and this procedure, if it does not obtain the wished-for results, does not constitute a reason justifying the delay.

Decision 20502 Full Text of Decision 20502

Essentially, the Board found that special reasons did not comprehend the case where one delegated the responsibility for prosecuting such appeal to a lawyer who failed to act within the time limit. In view of CHARTIER and PLOURDE, I am unable to find any error in law.

Decision 19843 Full Text of Decision 19843

Had instructed her lawyer to file an appeal but he failed to do so. The CEIC submitted that although she might thereby have an action against her counsel, her explanation did not constitute special reasons. I accept this position in the absence of an explanation from her counsel.

Decision A-0159.89 Full Text of Decision A-0159.89

Delay of 2 months. Time limitations for appeals must be respected for sound administration of the Act. Appeal procedures are simple. Contacting his MP and not obtaining desired results is not a reason for extension of time. Upheld by FC without comment.

Decision 16334 Full Text of Decision 16334

Refer to: A-0159.89

Decision 13814A Full Text of Decision 13814A

Appeal well beyond time limits. Counsel explained there had been a misunderstanding in the telephone instructions he had received. Claimant understood instructions to be for an appeal but he did not interpret them that way. As soon as he realized his mistake, he filed an appeal.

Decision 15899 Full Text of Decision 15899

Over 9 months late; he had given his papers to the Member of Parliament, a lawyer, who was supposed to look after it. This does not constitue special circumstances authorizing me to extend the appeal deadline.

Decision 14841 Full Text of Decision 14841

Delay not long (23-4 instead of by 8-3). Claimant had written to his MP and was under the impression everything would be taken care of by that route. He did not receive a response until 10-4 and it instructed him to appeal.

Decision 11411 Full Text of Decision 11411

Claimant committed his trust in union representative who apparently went on vacation and decided no appeal should be taken but never notified claimant. Cavalier negligence of him whom he trusted. For that special reason, the period of 60 days is extended.