HS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

HS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Commute distance alone does not automatically render a job unsuitable; the Claimant made sustained, reasonable and customary efforts to find work, rebutted the presumption of non‑availability arising from his studies by evidence (continued full‑time employment until layoff and self‑paced course with flexible flight...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 SST 239
Parties
Claimant: HS; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Suitable Employment, Reasonable and Customary Efforts, Disentitlement From Benefits, Study and Availability
Source Language
english
Employment Law Social Security Administrative Law Availability for Work Suitable Employment Reasonable and Customary Efforts Disentitlement From Benefits Study and Availability

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HS

Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the Claimant available for work during November 4, 2019 to January 8, 2020?
  2. 2 Whether commute distance alone renders employment unsuitable
  3. 3 Whether participation in a course rebutted the presumption of non‑availability for full‑time studies

Ratio Decidendi

Commute distance alone does not automatically render a job unsuitable; the Claimant made sustained, reasonable and customary efforts to find work, rebutted the presumption of non‑availability arising from his studies by evidence (continued full‑time employment until layoff and self‑paced course with flexible flight scheduling), and therefore was capable of and available for work and unable to find suitable employment for the disputed period.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The Commission's disentitlement for the period November 4, 2019 to January 8, 2020 is set aside
  • The Claimant is not disentitled from receiving Employment Insurance benefits for the disputed period