BC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

BC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Permission to appeal refused because the General Division correctly concluded that s.77.999(2) of the EI Regulations is unambiguous, excludes claims established before June 15, 2025, and the claimant did not demonstrate an arguable reviewable error required for leave.

Citation
2026 SST 14
Parties
Applicant (claimant): B. C.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Leave to Appeal to Appeal Division / Permission to Appeal (leave) Decision
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Leave to Appeal, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Application of Rizzo & Rizzo, Driedger Principle
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Statutory Interpretation Leave to Appeal Tribunal Jurisdiction Application of Rizzo & Rizzo Driedger Principle

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. C.

Applicant (claimant)

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Leave to Appeal to Appeal Division / Permission to Appeal (leave) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division erred in interpreting section 77.999(2) of the Employment Insurance Regulations
  2. 2 Whether the General Division failed to apply the Driedger modern principle of statutory interpretation as articulated in Rizzo & Rizzo
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal may extend or rewrite a legislated benefit period for fairness reasons

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal refused because the General Division correctly concluded that s.77.999(2) of the EI Regulations is unambiguous, excludes claims established before June 15, 2025, and the claimant did not demonstrate an arguable reviewable error required for leave.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Appeal will not proceed