AI v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

AI v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Commission’s review was within the permissible extended 72‑month period because it was reasonably satisfied false or misleading statements had been made; while employer payroll established gross wages, the claimant demonstrated she incurred deductible expenses (payment to a substitute) leaving net semi‑monthly income of $240.00, and therefore allocable weekly earnings must reflect the net amounts after deductible expenses and be allocated to the weeks in which the services were performed. The appeal is allowed in part to adjust allocations accordingly.

Citation
2021 SST 60
Parties
Appellant (claimant): A. I.; Respondent (commission): Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Reconsideration (remitted by Appeal Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Allocation of Earnings, Overpayment, Reconsideration Period, False or Misleading Statements, Deductible Employment Expenses
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Social Security Administrative Law Allocation of Earnings Overpayment Reconsideration Period False or Misleading Statements Deductible Employment Expenses

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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. I.

Appellant (claimant)

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent (commission)

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Reconsideration (remitted by Appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the Commission review the claims within the required timeframe?
  2. 2 Is the Claimant’s income earnings for the purpose of EI?
  3. 3 What amount of the Claimant’s earnings are to be allocated?

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission’s review was within the permissible extended 72‑month period because it was reasonably satisfied false or misleading statements had been made; while employer payroll established gross wages, the claimant demonstrated she incurred deductible expenses (payment to a substitute) leaving net semi‑monthly income of $240.00, and therefore allocable weekly earnings must reflect the net amounts after deductible expenses and be allocated to the weeks in which the services were performed. The appeal is allowed in part to adjust allocations accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part