LH v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

LH v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Appellant admitted she was a full‑time student, triggering the presumption of non‑availability; she did not prove capability and availability for full‑time work under the Act and Regulations, so she was disentitled to EI benefits and the resulting overpayment remains her liability because the Tribunal lacks...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 SST 497
Parties
Appellant: L. H.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division (social Security Tribunal) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Availability for Work, Full Time Student Presumption, Overpayment, Disentitlement
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Availability for Work Full Time Student Presumption Overpayment Disentitlement

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L. H.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division (social Security Tribunal) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the Appellant available for work while a full-time student?
  2. 2 Whether the overpayment caused by the Commission's payment in error can be erased or waived

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant admitted she was a full‑time student, triggering the presumption of non‑availability; she did not prove capability and availability for full‑time work under the Act and Regulations, so she was disentitled to EI benefits and the resulting overpayment remains her liability because the Tribunal lacks authority to erase it.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Overpayment in the amount of $6,588.00 upheld and remains the Appellant's liability