CE v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

CE v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Commission proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant wilfully or recklessly breached the employer’s Code of Conduct and Ethics by failing to disclose an outside business activity and by borrowing a non‑nominal sum from another employee; those breaches destroyed the trust necessary for employment...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2023 SST 1919
Parties
Appellant: C. E.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance (ei) Appeal / General Division Decision (hearing and Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits for misconduct
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Disqualification From Benefits, Employer Policy Breach, Outside Business Activities, Conflict of Interest, Nepotism, Borrowing/lending Between Employees
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Employment Law Labour Law Misconduct Disqualification From Benefits Employer Policy Breach Outside Business Activities +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. E.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance (ei) Appeal / General Division Decision (hearing and Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the appellant lose his job because of misconduct under the Employment Insurance Act?
  2. 2 Whether failure to disclose outside business activity constituted wilful misconduct
  3. 3 Whether borrowing money from another employee constituted wilful misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellant wilfully or recklessly breached the employer’s Code of Conduct and Ethics by failing to disclose an outside business activity and by borrowing a non‑nominal sum from another employee; those breaches destroyed the trust necessary for employment and constituted misconduct under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act, warranting disqualification from EI benefits. Other alleged irregularities were not all proven but were unnecessary to the finding of misconduct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits for misconduct

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant disqualified from receiving EI benefits under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act