M. P. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

M. P. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The General Division erred in law by failing to consider the totality of relevant facts (appellant's fear, threats, vulnerability and the co-worker's violent criminal record) and therefore the evidence did not support a finding that the appellant's failure to report was conscious, deliberate misconduct; appeal allowed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 SSTADEI 157
Parties
Appellant: M. P.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / Appeal Division Decision (leave to Appeal Granted)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Loss of Employment, Eligibility for EI Benefits, Standard of Review, Burden of Proof
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Labour/employment Law Misconduct Loss of Employment Eligibility for EI Benefits Standard of Review Burden of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. P.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / Appeal Division Decision (leave to Appeal Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant lost her employment by reason of her own misconduct under sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act
  2. 2 Whether the General Division erred in law and/or made an erroneous finding of fact in concluding misconduct had occurred

Ratio Decidendi

The General Division erred in law by failing to consider the totality of relevant facts (appellant's fear, threats, vulnerability and the co-worker's violent criminal record) and therefore the evidence did not support a finding that the appellant's failure to report was conscious, deliberate misconduct; appeal allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed