Decision A-0567.99

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
Decision A-0567.99 Radigan Mary  Federal  English 2001-01-31
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Dismissed Unanimous  No Commission  42598A 

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
earnings  awards  rationale 


In characterizing settlement amounts as earnings or non-earnings it is important to keep in mind the basic principles. A settlement payment made in respect of an action for wrongful dismissal is "income arising out of ...employment" unless due to "special circumstances" some portion of it should be regarded as compensation for some other expenses or loss. While the principles enunciated in Renaud (CUB 17899) were "generally" endorsed by the FCA in Dunn (A-0231.95), the Court reiterated that in each case it is a matter of fact to be determined on the evidence as to the various components of the settlement.

Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
earnings  awards  nature of monies 


Part of the settlement for wrongful dismissal paid to the claimant included 1 500$ for job search expenses and 2 500$ for job training expenses. Relying on the decision in Jean Renaud, CUB 17849, the Commission considered these expenses as income to be allocated since they had not actually incurred. Umpire ruled that the principles enunciated in the Renaud case were not absolute in their terms and that they were reasonable expenses which the claimant would eventually incur. The Court agreed with Umpire that as long as there is a genuine intent to so spend the expenses, it would be too restrictive to insist that in every case there must be clear evidence that such costs have been "actually incurred".

Date modified: