Gagné c. Canada (Procureur Général)
The umpire's factual conclusion that the claimant was not unemployed was not reviewable, but the Commission's penalty exceeded the statutory maximum under s.38(2)(a); therefore the application for judicial review is allowed only to correct the penalty to $7,021 and the matter is remitted to the umpire to allow the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2001 FCA 156
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Pierre Gagné; Defendant: The Attorney General of Canada
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for judicial review allowed in part; remitted to the umpire to allow the claimant's appeal with respect to the penalty and reduce the penalty to $7,021; no costs awarded.
- Legal Topics
- Penalty Assessment, Definition of Unemployment, Statutory Maximum Penalty
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pierre Gagné
Plaintiff
The Attorney General of Canada
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant was unemployed within the meaning of s.30 of the Employment Insurance Regulations
- 2 Whether the penalty imposed exceeded the maximum authorized by s.38(2)(a) of the Employment Insurance Act
- 3 Appropriate remedy where administrative decision exceeds statutory limits
Ratio Decidendi
The umpire's factual conclusion that the claimant was not unemployed was not reviewable, but the Commission's penalty exceeded the statutory maximum under s.38(2)(a); therefore the application for judicial review is allowed only to correct the penalty to $7,021 and the matter is remitted to the umpire to allow the claimant's appeal as to penalty.
Court Disposition
Application for judicial review allowed in part; remitted to the umpire to allow the claimant's appeal with respect to the penalty and reduce the penalty to $7,021; no costs awarded.
Orders
- Application for judicial review allowed in part
- Matter referred back to the umpire to allow the claimant's appeal with respect to the penalty
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Gagné c. Canada (Procureur Général) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2001-05-15 Neutral citation 2001 FCA 156 File numbers A-839-99 Decision Content Date: 20010515 Docket: A-839-99 MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, MAY 15, 2001 Coram: DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A. Between: PIERRE GAGNÉ, residing at 2512 de Lombrette in the city and district of Laval, H7L 4P4 Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant JUDGMENT The application for judicial review is allowed solely to return the matter to the umpire for him to allow the claimant's appeal with respect to the penalty and find that the amount should be $7,021 instead of $11,977. Page: 2 There will be no costs. Robert Décary J.A. Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. Date: 20010515 Docket: A-839-99 Coram: DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A. Between: PIERRE GAGNÉ, residing at 2512 de Lombrette in the city and district of Laval, H7L 4P4 Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 Judgment from the bench at Montréal, Quebec on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DÉCARY J.A. Date: 20010515 Docket: A-839-99 Neutral reference: 2001 FCA 156 Coram: DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A. Between: PIERRE GAGNÉ, residing at 2512 de Lombrette in the city and district of Laval, H7L 4P4 Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec on Tuesday, May 15, 2001) DÉCARY J.A. [1] We consider that the umpire made no reviewable error in concluding that the claimant, who was operating his own business and by his own account spent most of his time on it, was not unemployed within the meaning of s. 30 of the Employment Insurance Regulations. [2] However, the defendant admitted at the hearing that the amount of $11,977 imposed by the Commission as a penalty exceeded the maximum amount authorized by s. 38(2)(a) of the Employment Insurance Act. The maximum authorized was in fact $7,021. [3] The application for judicial review will accordingly be allowed, but only so as to correct the amount of the penalty, and the matter will be referred back to the umpire for him to allow the claimant's appeal in respect of the penalty, which should be reduced from $11,977 to $7,021. [4] In the circumstances, costs will not be awarded. Robert Décary J.A. Montréal, Quebec May 15, 2001 Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION Date: 20010515 Docket: A-839-99 Between: PIERRE GAGNÉ Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA APPEAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD FILE: A-839-99 CORAM: DÉCARY J.A. LÉTOURNEAU J.A. NOËL J.A. STYLE OF CAUSE: PIERRE GAGNÉ Plaintiff AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Defendant PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: May 15, 2001 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DÉCARY J.A. DATE: May 15 ,2001 APPEARANCES: Madeleine Leduc FOR THE PLAINTIFF Suzon Létourneau FOR THE DEFENDANT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Madeleine Leduc Sainte-Thérèse, Quebec FOR THE PLAINTIFF Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Montréal, Quebec FOR THE DEFENDANT