Summary of Issue: Language To Be Used

Decision A-0380.97 Full Text of Decision A-0380.97

Claimant is Francophone. At the hearing before the Umpire, the presentation made by the Commission’s representative was delivered entirely in English. The interpreter began to stumble, and stopped translating. Despite the claimant’s objections, the Umpire did not see fit to respond. Consequently, the claimant was unable to understand what was being presented, and could not respond with full knowledge of the matter. FCA found that such an infringement of the principles of natural justice necessarily vitiated the procedure before the Umpire, and hence the decision resulting from it. The matter was referred back to another Umpire for re-hearing in a manner that would fully respect the principles of natural justice.

Decision A-0281.95 Full Text of Decision A-0281.95

Alleged by representative that the BOR failed to ascertain the competency of claimants' interpreters. Umpire held that where the interpreter is the appellant's selectee, it should be safe to assume that his/her competency has been acknowledged and accepted by the appellant. Not disturbed by the FCA.

Decision 25973A Full Text of Decision 25973A

Refer to: A-0281.95

Decision 25574 Full Text of Decision 25574

There is no evidence to suggest that the Board was biased because its members understood the French language. The claimant's proposition that only a unilingual Board or Umpire would be capable of rendering an unbiased judgment in his case is obviously untenable.

Decision 14708 Full Text of Decision 14708

One member could not hear claimant, he frequently asked her to speak up and continued to do so after she had raised her voice. Another did not understand what she was saying. I found claimant a credible witness and there was at least appearance of unfairness.

Decision 14516 Full Text of Decision 14516

Claimant clearly had requested an appeal before a Board in English even though some of his correspondence was in French for the benefit of the CEIC officer. No prejudice even if heard in French since claimant did not appear at the hearing.

Decision 14501 Full Text of Decision 14501

Claimant had clearly asked for a hearing in English but case heard in French. This alone would justify a new hearing.

Decision 12494 Full Text of Decision 12494

Only one of members understood French. This procedure failed to observe principle of natural justice. Case referred back to new board.

Decision 11992 Full Text of Decision 11992

The fact that claimant may speak or write French is not a sufficient reason to deny someone the right to have a hearing in English if that is what is requested. Irrelevant that he did not object to the irregularity. To be allowed time for full explanation of his case.