Decision A-0384.78
Full Text of Decision A-0384.78
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
absence of a regulation |
|
Summary:
Para. 2(1)(n) amended by adding the phrase "prescribed reduction in earnings", but no reduction prescribed by regulation. Accordingly, no effect may be given to the amendment, which is subject to regulations being made to cover this situation.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
charter |
|
|
| interruption of earnings |
conditions required |
reduction in hours |
|
Decision A-1191.88
Full Text of Decision A-1191.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
It is now well established that a claimant has no vested right that the rules under which benefits will be paid to him on a weekly basis will remain fixed and immutable after the moment he makes his claim. Any change in those rules will be applicable to him.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
applicability |
implicit request |
|
| claim procedure |
applicability |
general |
|
| earnings |
pension |
as income |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
Decision 15446
Full Text of Decision 15446
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0778.88
Decision A-0778.88
Full Text of Decision A-0778.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Claimant says he would have acted otherwise had he been aware that the law would be amended. All have to respect the fact that Parliament can change the law from time to time in the exercise of its constitutional powers, as per Umpire. Implicitly concurred in by FC.
Decision 13068
Full Text of Decision 13068
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Even though the benefit period commenced prior to 31-3-85, whether monies subsequently received are earnings under reg. 57 must be determined with reference to the wording of that regulation at the time that he actually claimed his benefits, i.e. on a bi-weekly basis.
Decision A-0178.86
Full Text of Decision A-0178.86
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
The establishement of a benefit period does not create a right to receive benefits. Other conditions must be met. The legislative amendments that occur during the benefit period must be taken into account. [leave to appeal denied by SC]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
charter |
|
|
| basic concepts |
eligibility to benefits |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
| earnings |
pension |
charter |
|
Decision A-0235.81
Full Text of Decision A-0235.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Claimant engaged in uninsurable employment at time when there was provision treating it as insurable employment for the purposes of eligibility for maternity benefits. Claim made after provision repealed. No vested right.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
Decision A-0116.79
Full Text of Decision A-0116.79
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Insured accumulated 8 insurable weeks ending on Friday, 2-12. Act amended as of Sunday, 4-12: 10 weeks required instead of 8. Claim for benefit made on 5-12. No vested right to establish a benefit period before 4-12.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
number of weeks |
calculation |
Decision A-0006.80
Full Text of Decision A-0006.80
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
Because of strike, insured lost part-time job while he was claimant. Only vested rights: to claim benefits for a certain number of weeks. Entitlement is not a vested right because of 40(1). Case dismissed by FC without comment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| claim procedure |
proof required for entitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
while claiming ui |
|
Decision 27800
Full Text of Decision 27800
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
charter |
|
Summary:
I interpret s. 57 of the Federal Court Act as requiring notice before a section of the Act or a regulation is declared invalid, inapplicable or inoperable. It does not require notice before argument is heard, nor does it require notice if none of those results will follow.
One can understand why s. 57 was added to the Federal Court Act. The government does not wish to lose constitutional cases by default, for example as a result of a lack of an opportunity to prepare a proper evidentiary base for a case. But, one wonders if there is not a better solution than s. 57.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
to accompany spouse |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
applicability |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
marriage and move |
|
Decision 22557
Full Text of Decision 22557
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
charter |
|
Summary:
Where the constitutional validity of a federal statute is to be raised, s. 57 of the Federal Court Act requires that notice must be served within prescribed time limits to the Attorney General of Canada. I offered claimant an adjournment to this end. That offer was declined.
Decision 17026A
Full Text of Decision 17026A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
charter |
|
Summary:
I cannot refrain from commenting on the ludicrousness of s.57 (which requires that notice be given to the Attorneys General when a constitutional issue is to be argued). Following these comments, other comments follow with the opinion that 2 features ofs.57 are worth nothing.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
Decision 21305
Full Text of Decision 21305
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
charter |
|
Summary:
Under the amendments brought to the Federal Court in 2-92, particularly new Section 57, federal or provincial legislation or their regulations cannot be declared invalid unless persons concerned advised pursuant to para. 57(2). Case adjourned.
Decision 1493978
Full Text of Decision 1493978
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
charter |
|
Summary:
The establishment of conditions of entitlement was an integral part of a legislative scheme enacted for a valid federal purpose under s.91(2)(A) of the British North America Act and treating claimants differently based on those conditions does not invalidate such legislation.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| maternity benefits |
charter |
|
|
Decision 20198
Full Text of Decision 20198
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
contract and labour agreement |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1028.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
accumulated sick leave credits |
|
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of provision |
|
| earnings |
income |
paid or payable |
|
Decision A-1028.91
Full Text of Decision A-1028.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
contract and labour agreement |
|
Summary:
We are all of the opinion that the Umpire was correct to decide that the Board had erred in law by interpreting a clear clause in the collective agreement governing the claimants in a manner which contradicted its text.
Effectively, while the parties are free, as far as they are both concerned, to interpret their agreement the way they mutually agree, they do not enjoy the same freedom when their interpretation affects the rights of third parties.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
accumulated sick leave credits |
|
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of provision |
|
| earnings |
income |
paid or payable |
|
Decision 18889
Full Text of Decision 18889
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
contract and labour agreement |
|
Summary:
Earnings for 1-1 and 2-1 correctly distributed over the week of 1-1-89 even though the agreement between the employer and the union included these days of leave in the week ending 31-12-88. Parties to a contract cannot, by agreement, prevent the law from being applied.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
wages or salary |
designated holidays |
|
Decision 17902
Full Text of Decision 17902
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
contract and labour agreement |
|
Summary:
Those concerned in negotiating the signing bonus intended that the payment would not be treated as income allocated to the week in which paid. Parties to a contract cannot by their agreement avoid the application of general laws, as the Act is, to theirsituation.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
allocation |
transaction |
|
| earnings |
bonus |
signing contract |
|
Decision A-0417.01
Full Text of Decision A-0417.01
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The claimant having been misled by employees of the Commission, the BOR and the Umpire determined that the overpayment should be reduced by 50%. The FCA found that neither the BOR nor the Umpire had jurisdiction or authority to compel the Commission to exercise its discretion to write off an overpayment. Further, neither the BOR nor the Umpire are free to declare the Commission's refusal to be an abuse of process.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
| umpires |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Decision 51479
Full Text of Decision 51479
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under FCA A-0417.01
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
| umpires |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Decision A-0874.97
Full Text of Decision A-0874.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The BOR did not have the jurisdiction to decide whether the Commission had rightly refused to write off the debt and the Umpire erred in not cancelling the BOR's decision in this respect. The debtor should have proceeded by requesting a judicial review before the Trial Division of the FCA and not by appealing to the Umpire. Obviously the Commission must record its decision and convey it to the person concerned.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
time limitation |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
Decision A-0639.97
Full Text of Decision A-0639.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Penalty of $5,200.00 imposed at the rate of 200% for making 20 false statements. Possibility of reducing the amount not considered by BOR (position dating from before Morin, A-453-95). Situation recognized by the Umpire who, even in light of the Morin decision, found that a reduction in the penalty was not justified in this case. FCA refused to intervene, ruling that it was satisfied the Umpire had taken into consideration all the aggravating and extenuating circumstances that appear in the file.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
second offence |
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
mitigating circumstances |
|
Decision 39197
Full Text of Decision 39197
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
It is a recognized fact that the power of write-off is entirely at the discretion of the Commission, and that a decision made in exercising this discretionary power may only be reversed if the discretionary power has been exercised in a non-judicial way. However, Umpire found that the earlier case law on s. 60(2) cannot withstand the jurisprudential change of direction that has occurred in the Purcell (A-0694.94) and Morin (A-0453.95) cases. Since the decision in those cases, a new trend has emerged, namely to accord the BOR the power to have more control over the Commission’s discretionary decisions. Umpire therefore upheld the BOR’s decision, indicating that the BOR had the jurisdiction required to intervene in the Commission’s exercise of discretionary power under s. 60(2).**NOTE: The Commission is calling for a judicial review before the FCA, because the decision was in accordance with the Act and Regulations, and because the Commission’s position is supported by recent case law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
Decision A-0926.96
Full Text of Decision A-0926.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Claimant reported that he had not worked on his own account and that he had no connection to the employer, whereas he owned 25% of the employer’s shares. Umpire upheld the Board of Referees’ decision which found that the claimant was not credible and had made a false statement. FCA found that the claimant failed to show that the BOR and the Umpire came to an unreasonable decision in ratifying the 300% penalty imposed. It added that the BOR and Umpire are authorized to intervene only if it is shown that the Commission exercised its discretionary power in a non-judicial manner. This was not shown.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
Decision A-0681.96
Full Text of Decision A-0681.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Penalty reduced from $1,690 to $845 by the Umpire. The FCA found that it would have been desirable for the Umpire to rule clearly, in the first place, on the legality of the exercise of discretionary power by the Commission before determining the appropriateness of varying the penalty. However, the Court inferred from the Umpire’s two decisions that he had carried out this step and had thus not erred in reducing the penalty.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
|
|
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
commission policy |
|
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
mitigating circumstances |
|
Decision A-0701.96
Full Text of Decision A-0701.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The BOR recognized some mitigating factors (penalty greater than the penalty amount imposed on the respondent's employer and claimant's financial hardship) but did not reduce the amount of penalty because it believed it lacked authority to do so. Amount reduced by Umpire. The FCA held that there was no "decision or order" made by the BOR that could be reviewed by the Umpire. The Court, referring to its previous decisions in Morin (A-453-95), Dunham (A-708-95) and Mucciarone (A-464-96), allowed the Commission's appeal and ordered that the case be remitted back to the BOR for determination of the amount of penalty.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
mitigating circumstances |
|
Decision A-0464.96
Full Text of Decision A-0464.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Penalty of $4,536 was reduced to $18 by the Board of Referees, which cited the claimant’s precarious financial position. This decision was reversed by the Umpire, who found that the BOR had no jurisdiction to vary the amount of the penalty. This decision was set aside by the FCA, which referred the matter back to the Umpire for him to determine whether, given the claimant’s financial position, the BOR had judicially exercised its discretionary power in cancelling, for all practical purposes, the penalty imposed by the Commission. The FCA reminded the Umpire that a BOR should not cancel a penalty or reduce it to a token amount unless the circumstances are exceptional. **NOTE: In a subsequent decision (CUB 33564A), the Umpire took into consideration certain extenuating circumstances that had not been present initially, and reduced the penalty by half (from $4,536 to $2.268). This decision was not deemed to be unreasonable by the Commission, and no appeal was made to the FCA.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
|
|
Decision T-2369.95
Full Text of Decision T-2369.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Claimant's appeal as to her disqualification for misconduct allowed. Twice the employer requested a new hearing which was granted by the BOR. Claimant filed an application for a writ of prohibition to stop the third hearing. The FCA recognized the BOR' jurisdiction to reopen the hearing but found that the employer had been given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The FCA found however that in the particular circumstances of the case, such an excess of litigation was unreasonable and imposed hardship upon the claimant.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
right to be heard |
employer |
|
Decision A-0708.95
Full Text of Decision A-0708.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The FCA first noted that the Morin decision (A-453-95) had ended the controversy that had existed since the decision in Von Findenigg (A-737-82) concerning the power of the BOR and the Umpire to intervene and to exercise themselves the discretionary power conferred upon the Commission. The FCA went on to state that to verifiy the exercise of this discretionary power, the Board of Referees is not limited to the facts that were before the Commission, but may take into account facts of which the Board itself becomes aware. The Board must find that an essential consideration has been ignored, for it is not entitled to substitute its own discretion, purely and simply, for that of the Commission. In such a case, the Board may refer the matter back to the Commission or make a determination itself, if it deems itself able to do so legitimately.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
commission policy |
|
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
|
|
Decision 34820
Full Text of Decision 34820
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
In Morin FCA A-453-95, the Court stated that greater deference must be given to the Commission on its use of its power under the Act but that does not mean that the Umpire is unable to reduce a penalty. It simply means that the particular circumstances must truly warrant intervention.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| board of referees |
natural justice |
defined |
|
Decision 28068A
Full Text of Decision 28068A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0681.96
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
|
|
| penalties |
commission policy |
|
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
mitigating circumstances |
|
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 |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
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 |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-0453.95
Full Text of Decision A-0453.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
To maintain that the Umpire's authority to give the decision that should have been given is withdrawn when the decision under attack is a discretionary one would be inconsistent with the Act and with Parliament's intent. Matter referred back to an Umpire for redetermination with the assumption that he has jurisdiction to change the amount of the penalty imposed if he concludes that the Commission did not exercise its discretion in a judicial manner.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
Decision 22558A
Full Text of Decision 22558A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0448.95
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision A-0448.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
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 |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 25953
Full Text of Decision 25953
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0694.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
independent decision-making |
|
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
remove |
|
Decision A-0694.94
Full Text of Decision A-0694.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Whether the phrase "in its opinion" has the effect of insulating the Commission's decision to impose a penalty from the review by the BOR. Held that BOR possesses the requisite jurisdiction to formulate its own opinion with respect to a false or misleading statement.
The BOR is empowered to engage in a de novo review with respect to factual matters and is in a better position to make objective findings of fact. It is the BOR which functions as a quasi-judicial body not the Commission.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
independent decision-making |
|
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
remove |
|
Decision 29211
Full Text of Decision 29211
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to summary indexed under FCA A-0708.95
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
| penalties |
commission policy |
|
|
| penalties |
amount of penalty |
|
|
Decision A-0464.94
Full Text of Decision A-0464.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
At issue: the power to reduce length of disqualification. In the rare case where a Commission decision can be set aside for fundamental error, the Umpire or Board of Referees is limited to referring the matter back to the Commission for a proper exercise of its discretion.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
disqualification |
length |
powers |
Decision 24929
Full Text of Decision 24929
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0464.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
disqualification |
length |
powers |
Decision A-0308.94
Full Text of Decision A-0308.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The jurisprudence establishes clearly that neither a Board nor an Umpire may exercise the discretionary powers conferred on the CEIC. Such a decision cannot be overturned unless vitiated by a fundamental error. There is no reason not to apply this to a decision fixing the length of a disqualification.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
disqualification |
length |
powers |
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 |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The matter will be referred back to the Umpire on the basis that the question whether or not the Commission exercised its discretion judicially in refusing the extension must be decided by the Umpire before he decides whether or not to order the appeal to be heard on its merits.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
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 |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
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 |
special reasons |
appealable |
time for appeal to bor |
| board of referees |
special reasons |
discretion of Commission |
time for appeal to bor |
Decision 21688
Full Text of Decision 21688
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1449.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
leave of absence granted |
|
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
disqualification |
|
Decision A-1449.92
Full Text of Decision A-1449.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The Umpire erred in finding that the reduced rate should have terminated on 31-8-91. Ss. 30(7) confers a discretion on the Commission. The Umpire is not allowed to exercise a discretion that the legislation explicitly confers on the Commission itself.
Once the Umpire decided that the ss. 30(7) discretion had not been exercised at all, he ought to have referred the matter back to the Board with directions that the Board should remit the matter back to the Commission for reconsideration on the basis that it exercise its discretion under ss. 30(7).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
disqualification |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
leave of absence granted |
|
Decision T-1765.89
Full Text of Decision T-1765.89
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
The exercise of discretionary power can be reviewed only if the deciding authority acted without or beyond its jurisdiction, violated procedural fairness, or acted in a discriminatory, unreasonable or perverse manner.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
new facts vs reconsideration |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
change in jurisprudence |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
claimant's request |
reconsideration of claim by Commission |
Decision 10633
Full Text of Decision 10633
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Various judgments examined for a proper interpretation of the words "in the opinion of" a deciding authority. Note: this case, HARBOUR, was reviewed by the Federal Court who disagreed with the reasoning but agreed with the result.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
claim required |
|
|
| basic concepts |
eligibility to benefits |
|
|
| basic concepts |
types of claims |
|
|
| claim procedure |
discretionary power waiver or variation of requirements |
|
|
Decision A-0576.95
Full Text of Decision A-0576.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
make regulations |
|
Summary:
Held by FCA that par. 44(y) of the Act grants to the Commission a broad authority to make regulations. This provision, combined with the wording in ss. 28(3) of the Act "or as otherwise prescribed" left to the Commission the authority of enlarging the meaning of the word "employment" contained in s. 28 of the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
employment |
last |
| basic concepts |
disqualification |
applicability |
|
Decision A-0298.74
Full Text of Decision A-0298.74
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
make regulations |
|
Summary:
Para. 58(j) does not allow regulations to be made subordinating proof of fulfilment of the prescribed conditions to proof of a fact that has no logical connection to fulfilment of those conditions. Connection must be such that one cannot exist without the other.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
applicability |
proof |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
as a requirement |
|
Decision 36937
Full Text of Decision 36937
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
There is no legal requirement that the UI Act and the Income Tax Act be consistent with one another and no power for me to offer any redress on the basis of their inconsistencies with one another.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
elected or appointed representative |
|
| reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
not a ground of entitlement |
|
Decision 21399
Full Text of Decision 21399
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
Total temporary workmen's compensation payments not defined in the Act. The application of a federal law surely does not depend on the language employed by a provincial law in the way it describes its benefits. Such an intention would have to be spelled out in the federal Act.
Decision 15115
Full Text of Decision 15115
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
The application of common law principles to the public law of Canada and Manitoba is not in doubt; and, indeed, logical and historical proof can be made to show that such principles are equally applicable to the public law of Quebec, but this latter view is not in issue here.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
requiring a document |
|
Decision 1909488
Full Text of Decision 1909488
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
I agree that the values embodied in the Charter [freedom of association] must be given preference over an interpretation which would run contrary to them. [p. 62]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Decision 13856
Full Text of Decision 13856
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
There is no doubt that, in the administration of a law of Canada, validly enacted provincial laws bearing on the same subject matter and not in conflict with Parliament's enactment are to be respected and observed.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
vacation pay |
trust fund |
|
Decision A-0451.85
Full Text of Decision A-0451.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
It is argued he should be given the benefit of provincial legislation specifying that a person remanded to a mental health facility is a patient. This is a definition for purposes of that legislation and does not apply to a different term in different legislation with a different purpose. [p.56]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| sickness benefits |
otherwise available |
|
|
| sickness benefits |
imprisonment |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
change of wording |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
context and titles |
|
| basic concepts |
qualifying period |
extension |
rationale |
Decision A-0175.84
Full Text of Decision A-0175.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under S-0175.84
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Decision A-0263.78
Full Text of Decision A-0263.78
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
Summary:
The judgment of this Court in Atkins was rendered under the Income Tax Act. It cannot be invoked when interpreting the UI Regulations unless it be clear that the word "income" has the same meaning in both enactments.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
charter |
|
|
| earnings |
rationale |
|
|
| earnings |
proof |
|
|
| earnings |
income |
applicability |
|
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
| earnings |
awards |
legal costs |
|
| earnings |
income |
amount unknown |
|
Decision 38437A
Full Text of Decision 38437A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The purpose of unemployment insurance (now employment insurance) is to provide assistance to those who have lost their jobs, are available for work and are making serious efforts to find new employment. It is not to provide benefits to those who are on holiday or convalescing outside Canada.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| sickness benefits |
out of canada |
|
|
Decision A-0126.97
Full Text of Decision A-0126.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Claimant left job in Nova Scotia to live with her boy friend in Windsor, Ont. Disqualified for V.L. without just cause. Appeal not based on the "common law relationship" argument but on Charter and Constitution Act, which guarantee the claimant's rights to move and take up residence, and to pursue the gaining of a livelihood, in any province. The UI Act provides a scheme of insurance for persons who become unemployed, not mobility insurance ruled the Umpire. The Act does not place any barrier nor discriminate against anyone on the basis of provincial residence. Claimant disqualified because she voluntarily left her employment in circumstances in which it cannot be said that she did not have any reasonable alternatives. Appeal summarily dismissed by the FCA.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
charter |
|
Decision 40261
Full Text of Decision 40261
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Clmt requested benefits for the first month of employment as a salesman because he earned no commission. Lack of earnings does not establish unemployment. It is not the purpose the Act to subsidize a person in any employment until such time he is able to generate earnings.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
commission salespersons |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
work without earnings |
|
|
Decision 27230
Full Text of Decision 27230
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0274.95
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
work without earnings |
|
|
Decision A-0274.95
Full Text of Decision A-0274.95
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Though I consider it praiseworthy that these beneficiaries wished to work, it remains that the Unemployment Insurance Act was not designed to compensate employees, when their employers are unable to pay their salaries owing to financial problems.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
work without earnings |
|
|
Decision 26990
Full Text of Decision 26990
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
As with any insurance scheme it is incumbent upon the person seeking benefits under the Plan to avoid increasing the risk of unemployment thereby casting the burden of supplying benefits to that person upon all the other contributors to the Plan. Not intended for those who elect not to be employed.
Decision A-0061.94
Full Text of Decision A-0061.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The underlying purpose of the Act is to provide a claimant with financial support until such time as she or he is able to find comparable employment. It is my understanding that it is not the purpose of the Act to discourage claimants from seeking part-time work which is precisely the case before us.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
computation |
|
Decision 23887
Full Text of Decision 23887
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0061.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
computation |
|
Decision 24975
Full Text of Decision 24975
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
It is well known that the purpose of the UI regime is to compensate persons who have involuntarily lost their employment. Thus, where persons have left their employment of their own accord or by their own doing, the system is not to be used for their benefit (see GAGNON).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
questions to examine |
|
|
Decision A-1472.92
Full Text of Decision A-1472.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The general scheme of the UI Act is to provide insurance through a national pooling of the risks and costs of unemployment. It is argued that the system is first a social security legislation. I accept that the Act cannot be understood and implemented as if it was simply a private insurance scheme.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
restrictions |
geographical area |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
type of work |
|
| refusal of work |
suitability |
defined |
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
definition |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
geographical area |
after moving |
Decision 21935
Full Text of Decision 21935
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1472.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
restrictions |
geographical area |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
type of work |
|
| refusal of work |
suitability |
defined |
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
definition |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
geographical area |
after moving |
Decision A-1393.92
Full Text of Decision A-1393.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Quoted from ABRAHAMS with approval: Since the overall purpose of the Act is to make benefits available to the unemployed, I would favour a liberal interpretation of the re-entitlement provisions. I think any doubt arising from the difficulties of the language must be resolved in favour of claimant.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
context and titles |
|
| basic concepts |
qualifying period |
extension |
incarcerated |
Decision 21630
Full Text of Decision 21630
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1393.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
context and titles |
|
| basic concepts |
qualifying period |
extension |
incarcerated |
Decision A-1036.92
Full Text of Decision A-1036.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
In approaching the interpretation of the UI Act, generally one must keep in mind the advice of the SC in ABRAHAMS and in HILLS to favour a liberal intepretation. Thus, Courts are urged by the Supreme Court of Canada to support the claims of workers to benefits where the language permits a choice.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision 21236
Full Text of Decision 21236
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1036.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
conditions required for disentitlement |
|
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
by reason of a stoppage |
|
| labour dispute |
loss of employment |
prior to stoppage |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision 22047
Full Text of Decision 22047
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Claimant asked why she was not entitled to UI after having contributed over more than 9 years. Claimants often share this misunderstanding. One contributes and one is entitled only in accord with the statute which generally supports those who, through no fault of their own, are unemployed.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
personal constraints |
after confinement |
|
Decision 19788
Full Text of Decision 19788
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0596.91
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| claim procedure |
interruption of benefit payments |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
Decision A-0596.91
Full Text of Decision A-0596.91
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
This is particularly so in light of GAGNON where the Supreme Court said that where two interpretations of provisions of the UI Act are possible, the worker must be given the benefit of the doubt, taking into account that the purpose of the Act is to compensate workers who are involuntarily unemployed.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| claim procedure |
interruption of benefit payments |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
Decision 19923
Full Text of Decision 19923
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The unemployment insurance program is not a statutory investment or savings plan which allows claimants the right to receive benefits merely because they have paid premiums. Claimants must establish their eligibility for benefits in accordance with the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
error by board |
|
Decision 2122291
Full Text of Decision 2122291
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The aim of the Act has always been to create a social insurance plan to compensate unemployed workers for loss of income from their employment and to provide them with economic and social security for a time, thus assisting them in returning to the labour market.
The aim of the UI Act is to compensate temporarily persons intent on remaining in the active labour force but who are at some point unable to find employment.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
| federal court |
role |
|
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
charter |
|
| federal court |
appeal system |
levels |
|
Decision 19326
Full Text of Decision 19326
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Benefits are intended to be paid as insurance to people between jobs when they have lost employment with one employer and are seeking employment with another.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
rationale |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
Decision 18827
Full Text of Decision 18827
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Held not available while taking a course. Believes the question of need should be considered. While the factors enumerated are of significance to him, they are not to be taken into account under the Act which does not provide for need to be considered.
Decision 17586
Full Text of Decision 17586
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Contributions alone are not sufficient to entitle one to UI. The UI fund is not a type of banking arrangement whereby claimants pay premiums into it and then when they are no longer working they are entitled to draw on the fund.
Decision 16974
Full Text of Decision 16974
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
As Umpires have said time and time again, UI benefits are for those who through no action on their part find themselves without work and who, in spite of continuous and intensive efforts to find work, cannot do so.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
presumption |
|
Decision 16022
Full Text of Decision 16022
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Ordinarily when one pays premiums for term insurance, for example term life insurance, one does not receive a return of any portion of the premiums paid if one happens to outlive the term agreed upon in the insurance contract. [re pensioners]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
pension |
rationale |
|
Decision S-1059.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The object of the Act is to compensate persons whose employment is terminated involuntarily and who are unemployed.
Once the criteria for general entitlement are satisfied [insurable employment, interruption of earnings and availability], entitlement is the rule and disentitlement the exception.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
conditions required |
|
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
necessary conditions |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| basic concepts |
benefit periods |
extension |
applicability |
| basic concepts |
benefit periods |
extension |
workers' compensation |
Decision 15311
Full Text of Decision 15311
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
I can sympathize with claimants' complaints as to unfairness of depriving them from benefits after so many years of paying premiums but only because they suffer from the misconception that UI is a form of savings to be returned to retired people.
Decision 1909488
Full Text of Decision 1909488
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Since the purpose of the Act is to make benefits available to the unemployed, a liberal interpretation of re-entitlement provisions is warranted, given the Act was not designed to deprive innocent victims of benefits and also employees do contribute to UI fund. [p. 35].
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Decision 14805
Full Text of Decision 14805
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
While the policy of the Act is to support those who are searching for work, that policy is implemented only in accordance with the legislative text of the Act. It is not enough to fit within the policy; a claimant must also fit within its legislative terms. [p. 10]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
observations from the Commission |
|
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
health reasons |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| earnings |
income |
not insurable |
|
| board of referees |
natural justice |
notice of hearing |
|
Decision 14652
Full Text of Decision 14652
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Claimant has no doubt, in common with many others, paid UI premiums for a long time, but those who do so, in common with others who pay premiums on term insurance are not entitled to recover premiums or to be excused from the terms of the policy.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
benefit periods |
extension |
wage-loss |
Decision 14282
Full Text of Decision 14282
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
To provide financial assistance to persons who, through no fault of their own, have become unemployed, have a sincere desire to work and make a personal effort to find work. Temporary relief while actively seeking work of a nature possible to find.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
purpose of the legislation |
|
Decision 12894
Full Text of Decision 12894
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Many people believe UI is a reserve that can be drawn on later on demand. Not sufficient to have contributed and be unemployed. Certain requirements must be met.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| teaching |
availability for work |
summer months |
|
Decision 12751
Full Text of Decision 12751
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Individuals assume that premiums give them a right to a return thereon. The UI system is not designed that way. Premiums are in the nature of another tax. The system is designed to pay unemployed individuals only in accordance with the rules set out in the Act.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
restrictions |
specific employer |
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
necessary conditions |
|
Decision 11895
Full Text of Decision 11895
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The purpose of UI is to provide temporary relief to those persons who, through no fault of their own, lose their employment and are actively seeking employment of a nature which can possibly be found at some location readily accessible to their residence.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
job search |
reliance on others |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
labour market information |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
as a useless act |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
number of contacts |
|
Decision 11143
Full Text of Decision 11143
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The UI Act is not simple to follow. It contains many twists and turns. Some of its provisions create conflicts. Law people often are in disagreement as to how it should be interpreted. Claimants have different perceptions and decisions sometimes create resentment.
Decision 11040
Full Text of Decision 11040
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Insured believed entitled to UI merely because contributed. Purpose of UI is exclusively to compensate for involuntary lay-offs and scarcity of jobs. Insurance against risk of unemployment. Numerous conditions must be met.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
presumption |
|
| availability for work |
courses |
interruption |
short period of time |
Decision 10835
Full Text of Decision 10835
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
The UI scheme is founded on a quasi-contractual philosophy. Individuals pay benefits and in return become insured persons. Their status and entitlement has nothing to do with other sources of income nor whether their assets are considerable or non-existent. [p. 8]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
charter |
|
|
Decision 10689
Full Text of Decision 10689
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Object of Act: to create a UI system to provide unemployed persons with collective benefits of their insurance premiums so that can survive until they find new employment. Availability essential. Several sections reflect this principle.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
imprisonment |
|
Decision A-0175.84
Full Text of Decision A-0175.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
See summary indexed under S-0175.84
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| labour dispute |
financing |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
provincial and other laws |
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
each word counts |
|
| labour dispute |
rationale |
|
|
Decision 1669883
Full Text of Decision 1669883
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Since the overall purpose of the Act is to make benefits available to the unemployed, I would favour a liberal interpretation of the re-entitlement labour dispute provisions. I think that any doubt arising from the language of the statute should be given to the claimant. [p._13]
Decision A-0872.80
Full Text of Decision A-0872.80
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
Since the overall purpose of the Act is to make benefits available to the unemployed, I would favour a liberal interpretation of the re-entitlement labour dispute provisions. I think that any doubt arising from the language of the statute should be given to the claimant. [p._13]
Decision A-0166.74
Full Text of Decision A-0166.74
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
purpose of ui system |
|
Summary:
This statute is even more difficult than most modern complicated statutes to comprehend. It is replete with special concepts created for the purpose of the statute. Its general scheme is almost completely obscured by being buried in detailed provisions.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| teaching |
earnings |
summer months |
|
