CW v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

CW v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Refusal of extension of time: the application was filed 29 days late, the Claimant failed to provide any explanation for the lateness despite being prompted, and even if time were extended the proposed appeal has no reasonable chance of success because it seeks only to re‑argue factual findings (misconduct and safety incidents) that are supported by the record and are not reviewable by the Appeal Division.

Citation
2024 SST 1089
Parties
Applicant / Claimant: C. W.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal Division / Extension of Time Decision (preliminary)
Outcome
Extension of time to file application refused; application will not proceed.
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Late Appeals, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Law Misconduct Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Late Appeals Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

C. W.

Applicant / Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal Division / Extension of Time Decision (preliminary)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the application to the Appeal Division filed within the statutory 30‑day limit?
  2. 2 Should the Appeal Division extend time to file the application?
  3. 3 Does the proposed appeal have a reasonable chance of success or raise an arguable case?

Ratio Decidendi

Refusal of extension of time: the application was filed 29 days late, the Claimant failed to provide any explanation for the lateness despite being prompted, and even if time were extended the proposed appeal has no reasonable chance of success because it seeks only to re‑argue factual findings (misconduct and safety incidents) that are supported by the record and are not reviewable by the Appeal Division.

Court Disposition

Extension of time to file application refused; application will not proceed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed as time‑barred and no extension is granted; the Appeal Division will not consider the merits.