Decision S-1059.84

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
S-1059.84  Gagnon S.  Supreme  French 1988-07-28
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Allowed Majority  No N/A 


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
interruption of earnings  conditions required 

Summary:

The Act sets out general criteria for entitlement: insurable employment for the required number of weeks and interruption of earnings from that employment.


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.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
availability for work  applicability  necessary conditions 

Summary:

The essential condition for entitlement to unemployment benefits is to be capable of and available for work and unable to obtain suitable employment.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  rules of construction  intent and object 

Summary:

When ambiguity arises from the fact that 2 interpretations are possible, having regard to the object of the Act, which is to compensate workers who are involuntarily unemployed, the worker must receive the benefit of the doubt.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
basic concepts  benefit periods  extension  applicability 

Summary:

Parliament's desire to benefit both inmates and injured workers is in the context of an Act that, for legislative policy reasons, grants broader or narrower benefits to different classes of claimants.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
basic concepts  benefit periods  extension  workers' compensation 

Summary:

It is difficult to understand why two insured persons disentitled under s. 36 because incapable of work should be treated differently because one received worker's compensation. This anomaly should not be remedied by judicial intervention. An insured who has received worker's compensation in the supplementary phase of the benefit period is entitled to an extension even if he was disentitled under s. 36.


Date modified: