Canada Employment Insurance Commission v. E. M.

Canada Employment Insurance Commission v. E. M.

The General Division erred in law by failing to apply the FCA's decision in Elyoumni; on the uncontested facts the respondent made no arrangements to be reachable and could not return within 48 hours, therefore he was not available for work during the exempted absence and is disentitled, with the period of disentitlement reduced by one day pursuant to Picard.

Citation
2017 SSTADEI 39
Parties
Appellant: Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Respondent: E. M.
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / Appeal Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; General Division decision varied.
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Absence From Canada, S.55 Exemption Under Regulations, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Law Availability for Work Absence From Canada S.55 Exemption Under Regulations Statutory Interpretation

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Appellant

E. M.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / Appeal Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent was available for work under s.18 of the Employment Insurance Act while outside Canada
  2. 2 Whether the General Division erred in law by failing to apply Canada (Attorney General) v. Elyoumni, 2013 FCA 151
  3. 3 Whether the General Division made an erroneous finding of fact regarding the respondent's ability to return within 48 hours

Ratio Decidendi

The General Division erred in law by failing to apply the FCA's decision in Elyoumni; on the uncontested facts the respondent made no arrangements to be reachable and could not return within 48 hours, therefore he was not available for work during the exempted absence and is disentitled, with the period of disentitlement reduced by one day pursuant to Picard.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; General Division decision varied.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • General Division decision varied in accordance with reasons