9091-8558 Québec. Inc. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

9091-8558 Québec. Inc. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Tribunal accepted employer evidence and corroborating witness testimony that claimant attended a work meeting in an inebriated and disruptive state, had a substantial history of disciplinary incidents and warnings, and therefore acted with such recklessness or wilfulness that dismissal was a real possibility;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 SSTGDEI 37
Parties
Appellant / Employer: 9091-8558 Québec Inc. (Services Avicole JGL); Claimant / Added Party: R. L.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance (ei) / General Division Appeal Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Disqualification From Benefits, Loss of Employment, Dismissal
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Labour and Employment Administrative Law Misconduct Disqualification From Benefits Loss of Employment Dismissal

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

9091-8558 Québec Inc. (Services Avicole JGL)

Appellant / Employer

R. L.

Claimant / Added Party

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance (ei) / General Division Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant lost his employment because of his own misconduct under sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act
  2. 2 Whether the claimant’s inebriation and workplace behaviour amounted to wilful misconduct
  3. 3 Whether the claimant’s complaints about vehicle safety were the true reason for dismissal or a pretext

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal accepted employer evidence and corroborating witness testimony that claimant attended a work meeting in an inebriated and disruptive state, had a substantial history of disciplinary incidents and warnings, and therefore acted with such recklessness or wilfulness that dismissal was a real possibility; misconduct was established and was the real reason for dismissal under sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Tribunal determines claimant lost his employment because of his own misconduct under sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act.