TD v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and X

TD v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and X

The Appeal Division found no legal error: the General Division reasonably accepted consistent employer statements and airline confirmation, found the Claimant's explanations not credible, applied the correct standard that the Employer/Commission must prove misconduct on a balance of probabilities, and did not shift...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 SST 846
Parties
Appellant / Claimant: T. D.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Added Party / Employer: X
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal to Social Security Tribunal Appeal Division / Appeal From General Division Decision After Reconsideration by Respondent
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Burden of Proof, Credibility Assessment, Hearsay Evidence, Reconsideration, Disqualification and Repayment
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Tribunal Procedure Misconduct Burden of Proof Credibility Assessment Hearsay Evidence Reconsideration +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T. D.

Appellant / Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

X

Added Party / Employer

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal to Social Security Tribunal Appeal Division / Appeal From General Division Decision After Reconsideration by Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division erred in law by finding misconduct in absence of employer's documentary evidence of fraud
  2. 2 Whether the General Division improperly shifted the burden of proof onto the Claimant by requesting supporting evidence only from him

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Division found no legal error: the General Division reasonably accepted consistent employer statements and airline confirmation, found the Claimant's explanations not credible, applied the correct standard that the Employer/Commission must prove misconduct on a balance of probabilities, and did not shift the burden to the Claimant; therefore the General Division's finding that the Claimant committed misconduct and lost employment for that reason stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed