GC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

GC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Appeal Division refused leave because there was no arguable case that the General Division erred: the General Division found the Commission had examined the four regulatory factors and acted judicially, the claimant did not establish overlooked evidence or unfair process that would alter the outcome, and therefore the appeal lacked a reasonable chance of success.

Citation
2020 SST 40
Parties
Claimant: G. C.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal – Application for Leave to Appeal / Appeal Division Decision on Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Reconsideration Request, Extension of Time, Discretionary Decision, Leave to Appeal, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Benefits Reconsideration Request Extension of Time Discretionary Decision Leave to Appeal Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G. C.

Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal – Application for Leave to Appeal / Appeal Division Decision on Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division exceeded its jurisdiction by reassessing facts and substituting its view for the Commission's discretionary decision
  2. 2 Whether the General Division overlooked or failed to consider relevant evidence (medical history, side effects, loss of housing, licence, supports)
  3. 3 Whether the General Division process was unfair by denying the claimant opportunity to present evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Division refused leave because there was no arguable case that the General Division erred: the General Division found the Commission had examined the four regulatory factors and acted judicially, the claimant did not establish overlooked evidence or unfair process that would alter the outcome, and therefore the appeal lacked a reasonable chance of success.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused.