DG v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

DG v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Leave to appeal denied because the claimant failed to show an arguable case that the General Division committed a reviewable error: the General Division applied the correct misconduct test, followed binding Federal Court precedents that non‑compliance with a known vaccination policy can constitute misconduct (suspension under s.31), and was not required or permitted to decide the claimant's Charter or Digest arguments in the Tribunal appeal context.

Citation
2025 SST 58
Parties
Applicant/claimant: D. G.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance (misconduct) Leave to Appeal / Appeal Division Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; General Division decision stands unchanged
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Vaccination Policy, Procedural Fairness, Charter Rights, Digest of Benefit Entitlement Principles, Suspension
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Constitutional Law Labour Law Misconduct Vaccination Policy Procedural Fairness Charter Rights +2 more

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D. G.

Applicant/claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance (misconduct) Leave to Appeal / Appeal Division Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the General Division used an unfair process or was biased
  2. 2 Whether the General Division erred by failing to explicitly and specifically consider Charter arguments
  3. 3 Whether the General Division erred by failing to consider the Digest of Benefit Entitlement Principles

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal denied because the claimant failed to show an arguable case that the General Division committed a reviewable error: the General Division applied the correct misconduct test, followed binding Federal Court precedents that non‑compliance with a known vaccination policy can constitute misconduct (suspension under s.31), and was not required or permitted to decide the claimant's Charter or Digest arguments in the Tribunal appeal context.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; General Division decision stands unchanged

Orders

  • Leave to appeal denied; appeal will not proceed; General Division decision dated December 16, 2024 remains in force