AA v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

AA v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Tribunal found the Commission had statutory authority under s.153.161 and s.52 to reopen and verify entitlement, that it exercised its discretion judicially, and that the Appellant—a verified full-time student—did not rebut the presumption of unavailability because he failed the third availability factor (he imposed unduly limiting conditions by attending classes on four weekdays), therefore he was not available for work as of January 6, 2021 and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
2023 SST 2035
Parties
Appellant: A. A.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance (ei) Appeal / General Division Hearing and Decision (reconsideration Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Student Disentitlement, Reconsideration/review Powers, Pandemic Temporary Measures, Overpayment
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Availability for Work Student Disentitlement Reconsideration/review Powers Pandemic Temporary Measures Overpayment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. A.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance (ei) Appeal / General Division Hearing and Decision (reconsideration Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commission could reopen and review the Appellant's claim
  2. 2 Whether the Commission exercised its discretion judicially in deciding to review the claim
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant was available for work while attending full-time school as of January 6, 2021

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the Commission had statutory authority under s.153.161 and s.52 to reopen and verify entitlement, that it exercised its discretion judicially, and that the Appellant—a verified full-time student—did not rebut the presumption of unavailability because he failed the third availability factor (he imposed unduly limiting conditions by attending classes on four weekdays), therefore he was not available for work as of January 6, 2021 and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant disentitled to EI regular benefits as of January 6, 2021