DR v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

DR v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

On the balance of probabilities the claimant intentionally refused to comply with a clear employer vaccination policy, knew that refusal would prevent him from working, and that wilful refusal constitutes misconduct under the EI Act; therefore he is disentitled to EI benefits and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
2022 SST 1585
Parties
Appellant (claimant): D. R.; Respondent (commission): Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Suspension, Vaccination Policy, Entitlement to Benefits, Just Cause
Source Language
English

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D. R.

Appellant (claimant)

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent (commission)

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Decision (appeal Dismissed)

  1. 1 Was the claimant suspended because of misconduct?
  2. 2 Whether refusal to comply with employer vaccination policy constitutes misconduct under the EI Act
  3. 3 Whether the claimant quit or was suspended

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the claimant intentionally refused to comply with a clear employer vaccination policy, knew that refusal would prevent him from working, and that wilful refusal constitutes misconduct under the EI Act; therefore he is disentitled to EI benefits and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Claimant disentitled from receiving Employment Insurance benefits pursuant to section 31 of the Employment Insurance Act