X v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and KK

X v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and KK

On the evidence the claimant did not lose her job because of misconduct: she requested sick leave, provided a medical note, the employer denied leave and produced inconsistent and unsupported allegations of progressive discipline and warnings, and the Commission therefore did not prove misconduct on the balance of probabilities.

Citation
2024 SST 1118
Parties
Appellant (employer): X; Respondent (commission): Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Added Party (claimant): K. K.
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Hearing Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; claimant not disqualified from receiving EI benefits.
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Voluntary Leaving, Sick Leave, Absenteeism, Benefit Entitlement
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Labour and Employment Misconduct Voluntary Leaving Sick Leave Absenteeism Benefit Entitlement

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Appellant (employer)

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent (commission)

K. K.

Added Party (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Hearing Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant voluntarily left or was dismissed
  2. 2 Whether the dismissal was for misconduct under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act
  3. 3 Whether the claimant had just cause for voluntary leaving

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence the claimant did not lose her job because of misconduct: she requested sick leave, provided a medical note, the employer denied leave and produced inconsistent and unsupported allegations of progressive discipline and warnings, and the Commission therefore did not prove misconduct on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; claimant not disqualified from receiving EI benefits.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; claimant entitled to EI benefits (not disqualified under s.30 of the Employment Insurance Act).