LC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

LC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The General Division considered the pandemic context and the claimant's medical vulnerability but found she failed to demonstrate availability because she did not undertake required job search efforts or seek suitable alternatives (eg remote work); there is no evidence the General Division ignored or misunderstood material evidence, so there is no arguable important error of fact or other ground for appeal and leave is refused.

Citation
2024 SST 1077
Parties
Applicant/claimant: L. C.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal (leave to Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Appeal Division
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Sickness Benefits, Overpayment, Suitable Employment, Leave to Appeal
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Availability for Work Sickness Benefits Overpayment Suitable Employment Leave to Appeal

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L. C.

Applicant/claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal (leave to Appeal) / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division made an important error of fact by failing to assess availability in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic
  2. 2 Whether the General Division failed to consider evidence that employment available to the claimant was unsuitable
  3. 3 Whether the General Division erred by ignoring or misunderstanding relevant evidence regarding job search efforts and suitability of work

Ratio Decidendi

The General Division considered the pandemic context and the claimant's medical vulnerability but found she failed to demonstrate availability because she did not undertake required job search efforts or seek suitable alternatives (eg remote work); there is no evidence the General Division ignored or misunderstood material evidence, so there is no arguable important error of fact or other ground for appeal and leave is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused; appeal will not proceed