Decision 55063
Full Text of Decision 55063
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Claimant's appeal filed more than three months after the notice of disentitlement had been sent. Claimant admitted that she had not filed an appeal earlier because of her own preoccupations and because she had forgotten to do so. Appeal dismissed. Decisions of the FCA in Chartier (T-0370.95), Dyson (A-0016.94) and Martin (A-1001.92) cited. The Umpire refused to intervene because the Commission had exercised its discretion in a judicial manner.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 54827
Full Text of Decision 54827
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Two letters, one for undeclared earnings and the other for false statements, were sent to claimant on March, 1996. Claimant filed a notice of appeal on May, 2001. Appeal denied by Commission but upheld by the BOR who reviewed evidence from the claimant and substituted its discretion for that of the Commission. Error in law found by Umpire: the only issue for determination by the BOR is whether the Commission exercised its discretion judicially. The BOR erred in its failure to deal with that issue.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 46859
Full Text of Decision 46859
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Claimant notified on June 4, 1998 that he was not entitled to benefits but did not file an appeal until March 23, 1999, that is nine months after he received the letter. The BOR concluded that the claimant had acted as a reasonable person because he had relied upon the union steward's advice. BOR erred in law in relying on the Albrecht case. The legislation authorizes the Commission to extend the time beyond the 30 day period "for special reasons". The test is not one of "good cause". The BOR has no jurisdiction to interfere with the Commission's exercise of discretion unless there is evidence that the Commission acted arbitrarily or in a non judicial manner.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 36662
Full Text of Decision 36662
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Notice of disentitlement sent on 15-07-94 and appeal filed on 09-03-95. Extension of appeal time limit refused by the Commission. Refusal appealed to the Board of Referees. Claimant's explanations accepted by the Board. It was found that the Board had not considered whether the Commission had exercised its discretion in a judicial manner. It had in fact substituted its discretion for that of the Commission. Board exceeded jurisdiction and erred in law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-0600.95
Full Text of Decision A-0600.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Late appeal (4 months). In the absence of an explanation as to how the Commission had not exercised its discretion in a judicial manner under subsection 79(1) of the Act, the Board of Referees could not substitute its discretion for that of the Commission. The Umpire therefore erred in not concluding that the Board of Referees had been wrong to substitute its discretion for that of the Commission.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Decision A-0796.95
Full Text of Decision A-0796.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Claimant's evidence was that she did not become fully aware that there was a viable right of appeal until she was advised by Jobs Ontario that she should have been receiving UI benefits. The BOR refused to allow her an extension of time to appeal but Umpire set the BOR's decision aside stating that it contained no finding of facts to support it. The Commission seeked judicial review of the Umpire's decision to the FCA but claimant simply consented to the Court's judgment.
Decision 22558A
Full Text of Decision 22558A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0448.95
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Decision A-0448.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The Umpire has taken it upon himself to simply proceed to a new evaluation of the facts and to grant the extension without first addressing the question of whether there was any indication that the Commission did not act judicially. Nothing on file to this effect. Commission's appeal allowed.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Decision 30424
Full Text of Decision 30424
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
It would be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights to interpret subsection 79(1) as allowing the Commission to control the procedure for the appeal of its decisions. Such an interpretation leads to a fundamental unfairness.
Decision 26763
Full Text of Decision 26763
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
I am not satisfied that the decision to extend or not extend the time to appeal to a Board from a decision of the Commission is anything more than an administrative decision. As such, I am further not satisfied that it carries with it many of the trappings of natural justice or procedural fairness.
Decision 26455
Full Text of Decision 26455
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Claimant's contention that he did not receive the notices until 1-8, and the evidence submitted in support, were clearly relevant considerations which the CEIC failed to take into account. This constituted an improper exercise of its discretion. The Board did not exceed its jurisdiction.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
decision not received |
|
Decision 24186A
Full Text of Decision 24186A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
I would observe that ss.79(1) is indeed an unusual provision. It appears to confer on one party to a proceeding, the Commission, the power to extend or not extend the time for an opposing party to bring an appeal to the Board. This is something that appears to be fundamentally unfair.
Decision A-0016.94
Full Text of Decision A-0016.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Held that claimant's letter was not an application to extend the time. In any event, ss. 79(1) is clear that the authority to extend the time for appeal is vested in the Commission and not in the Board or in the Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
jurisdiction exceeded |
|
Decision 21226
Full Text of Decision 21226
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Refer to: A-1001.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
grievance pending |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-1001.92
Full Text of Decision A-1001.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The reason given for his late appeal was before the Commission and the Board. Since the Commission had this evidence, the Umpire erred in concluding that the Commission failed to take relevant factors into account, thereby exceeding his jurisdiction. He erroneously substituted his discretion.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
grievance pending |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 22558
Full Text of Decision 22558
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0346.93
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-0346.93
Full Text of Decision A-0346.93
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The Umpire found that the Board had erred in law by failing to consider whether the Commission had exercised its discretion judicially. He ordered that the Board deal with the merit of the case. By so doing the Umpire effectively granted the extension. That was a clear excess of jurisdiction.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 21716
Full Text of Decision 21716
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The Board clearly erred in law by substituting its discretion for that of the Commission in finding that claimant's confusion regarding the appeal procedure constituted sufficient special reason for reversing the decision of the insurance officer in rejecting the late appeal.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
discretionary power |
|
Decision 17581
Full Text of Decision 17581
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0042.90
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
change in jurisprudence |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-0042.90
Full Text of Decision A-0042.90
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The Board held that a jurisprudential change constituted special reasons to extend the appeal period. The Board was not allowed to substitute its discretion for that of the Commission. The Umpire was correct in intervening.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
change in jurisprudence |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 14707
Full Text of Decision 14707
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Summary:
The Board may only hear matters which are referred to it within the prescribed time. Only the CEIC has the discretion to allow a late appeal. Claimant must therefore apply to the CEIC for permission. Until he does so, that issue cannot be brought beforethe Board. [p. 4]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
question not at issue |
|
| basic concepts |
insurability |
applicability |
|
