TS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

TS v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Claimant proved on a balance of probabilities that he had a right to reinstatement, sought reinstatement, and that the Minutes of Settlement expressly state the lump sum was paid for relinquishment of reinstatement rights; the employer's characterization on the ROE does not control. Therefore the $126,630.00 was not earnings under the Employment Insurance Regulations and should not have been allocated to EI benefits.

Citation
2021 SST 176
Parties
Appellant / Claimant: T. S.; Respondent / Commission: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Earnings Allocation, Severance Pay, Reinstatement Rights, Reconsideration Appeal, Record of Employment
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Labour Relations Administrative Law Social Security Earnings Allocation Severance Pay Reinstatement Rights Reconsideration Appeal +1 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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T. S.

Appellant / Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent / Commission

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lump sum paid for relinquishment of reinstatement rights constitutes earnings under the Employment Insurance Regulations
  2. 2 If the payment is earnings, whether the Commission allocated it correctly to EI benefits

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant proved on a balance of probabilities that he had a right to reinstatement, sought reinstatement, and that the Minutes of Settlement expressly state the lump sum was paid for relinquishment of reinstatement rights; the employer's characterization on the ROE does not control. Therefore the $126,630.00 was not earnings under the Employment Insurance Regulations and should not have been allocated to EI benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The $126,630.00 paid to the Claimant for relinquishment of his right to reinstatement is not earnings and should not be allocated to the Claimant's EI benefits
  • The appeal is allowed