BS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

BS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

On the balance of probabilities the claimant's cumulative, wilful or recklessly persistent failures (repeatedly not logging required pre-trip inspection time despite multiple warnings, taking an unauthorized route through Connecticut, and refusing/not attending work as directed on November 20, 2019) were the real reasons for dismissal; those actions amounted to misconduct under the legal tests cited, therefore the claimant is disqualified from EI benefits under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act.

Citation
2020 SST 1157
Parties
Claimant: B. S.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Decision Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; claimant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Disqualification From Benefits, Disciplinary Procedure, Alleged Racial Discrimination
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Employment Law Administrative Law Transportation Regulation Misconduct Disqualification From Benefits Disciplinary Procedure Alleged Racial Discrimination

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. S.

Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Decision Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant lost his job because of misconduct
  2. 2 Whether alleged racial discrimination caused the dismissal
  3. 3 Whether employer's failure to follow its disciplinary policy prevents a finding of misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the claimant's cumulative, wilful or recklessly persistent failures (repeatedly not logging required pre-trip inspection time despite multiple warnings, taking an unauthorized route through Connecticut, and refusing/not attending work as directed on November 20, 2019) were the real reasons for dismissal; those actions amounted to misconduct under the legal tests cited, therefore the claimant is disqualified from EI benefits under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; claimant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Claimant disqualified from EI benefits under section 30 of the Employment Insurance Act