JD v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

JD v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Commission failed to prove all required elements of EI misconduct because it could not establish a mandatory pre-2022 vaccination requirement or that the appellant knew of suspension consequences; therefore the appellant's intentional non‑vaccination did not legally constitute misconduct and did not disentitle her from EI benefits.

Citation
2024 SST 1066
Parties
Appellant: J. D.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Vaccination Policy, Entitlement to Benefits, Suspension, Procedural Jurisdiction, Informed Consent
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Employment Law Administrative Law Public Health Policy Misconduct Vaccination Policy Entitlement to Benefits Suspension +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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. D.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the appellant suspended for misconduct under the EI Act?
  2. 2 Does failure to take COVID-19 vaccine constitute misconduct absent clear employer policy and notice?
  3. 3 Whether the Commission met its burden to establish all elements of EI misconduct?

Ratio Decidendi

The Commission failed to prove all required elements of EI misconduct because it could not establish a mandatory pre-2022 vaccination requirement or that the appellant knew of suspension consequences; therefore the appellant's intentional non‑vaccination did not legally constitute misconduct and did not disentitle her from EI benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The Commission has not proven suspension was for misconduct and the appellant is not disentitled from EI benefits
  • The Commission's decision disentitling the appellant from EI benefits from October 25, 2021 to April 1, 2023 is set aside