Arbutus 1Hr Valet Inc. v. Canada

Arbutus 1Hr Valet Inc. v. Canada

The application was dismissed because the Umpire properly deferred to the Board of Referees' factual and credibility findings and there was no reviewable error; the joint hearing allegation was without merit and not properly before the Umpire; the tape complaint was not raised below and therefore not before the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 FCA 330
Parties
Applicant: Arbutus 1Hr Valet Inc.; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Attorney General for Canada; Human Resources Development of Canada/Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal; Judgment on Judicial Review Application
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs; Umpire's decision affirmed
Legal Topics
False and Misleading Statements, Penalty Under Unemployment Insurance Statute, Credibility and Findings of Fact, Joint Hearing Procedure, Disclosure of Hearing Tape, Delay
Source Language
en
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Procedural Fairness False and Misleading Statements Penalty Under Unemployment Insurance Statute Credibility and Findings of Fact Joint Hearing Procedure Disclosure of Hearing Tape +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arbutus 1Hr Valet Inc.

Applicant

Her Majesty the Queen; Attorney General for Canada; Human Resources Development of Canada/Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal; Judgment on Judicial Review Application

  1. 1 Whether the Umpire erred in upholding the Board of Referees' findings that the applicant made false and misleading statements contrary to section 33 of the Unemployment Insurance Act
  2. 2 Whether holding a joint hearing of four related appeals by one umpire breached natural justice
  3. 3 Whether failure to provide a tape of the hearing constituted a procedural unfairness

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the Umpire properly deferred to the Board of Referees' factual and credibility findings and there was no reviewable error; the joint hearing allegation was without merit and not properly before the Umpire; the tape complaint was not raised below and therefore not before the Court; and the Umpire correctly dealt with delay issues.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs; Umpire's decision affirmed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review dismissed with costs
  • Umpire's decision upholding the Board of Referees and the penalty of $7,434 affirmed