CC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

CC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Leave to appeal was refused because the claimant did not raise an arguable case: his procedural fairness complaints targeted the Commission rather than the General Division, there was no allegation the General Division denied a fair hearing or was biased, and his factual complaints amounted to a request to reweigh evidence rather than to show a perverse or capricious error; the General Division had considered pandemic effects and reasonably found the claimant's availability and job search inadequate.

Citation
2022 SST 401
Parties
Applicant / Claimant: C. C.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal (appeal Division)
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Procedural Fairness, Overpayment, Leave to Appeal, Reasonable Job Search
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Social Security Administrative Law Availability for Work Procedural Fairness Overpayment Leave to Appeal Reasonable Job Search

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. C.

Applicant / Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal (appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division failed to follow the rules of procedural fairness
  2. 2 Whether the General Division made factual errors concerning the claimant's availability for work

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the claimant did not raise an arguable case: his procedural fairness complaints targeted the Commission rather than the General Division, there was no allegation the General Division denied a fair hearing or was biased, and his factual complaints amounted to a request to reweigh evidence rather than to show a perverse or capricious error; the General Division had considered pandemic effects and reasonably found the claimant's availability and job search inadequate.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused.
  • The appeal will not proceed.