IE v Canada Employment Insurance Commission
The Appellant failed to prove he worked the 700 hours required in the applicable qualifying period (May 13, 2023 to March 30, 2024); only 39 insurable hours were established and hours worked before the qualifying period cannot be counted, therefore the Appellant does not qualify for EI benefits and the appeal is dismissed.
- Citation
- 2024 SST 1132
- Parties
- Appellant: I. E.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
- Court
- Social Security Tribunal of Canada
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 August 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Insurance / General Division Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Hours of Insurable Employment, Qualifying Period, Regional Rate of Unemployment, Insurable Hours Requirement
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
I. E.
Appellant
Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Appellant worked sufficient insurable hours within the applicable qualifying period to qualify for EI benefits
- 2 Whether hours worked outside the qualifying period or in a prior benefit period can be counted toward qualification
Ratio Decidendi
The Appellant failed to prove he worked the 700 hours required in the applicable qualifying period (May 13, 2023 to March 30, 2024); only 39 insurable hours were established and hours worked before the qualifying period cannot be counted, therefore the Appellant does not qualify for EI benefits and the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed; Appellant not entitled to Employment Insurance benefits for the period at issue
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment