Campbell v. Canada (Attorney General)

Campbell v. Canada (Attorney General)

The Umpire erred by failing to apply the reasonableness standard to the mixed fact and law issue and by substituting his view for that of the Board of Review; accordingly the application for judicial review is allowed, the Umpire's decision is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Chief Umpire (or designate)...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2008 FCA 331
Parties
Applicant: Todd Campbell; Respondent: The Attorney General of Canada
Court
Federal Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Under Federal Courts Act S.28(1)(m) Concerning the Employment Insurance Act / Federal Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Judicial Review; Remittal to Chief Umpire
Outcome
Application for judicial review allowed; Umpire's decision set aside; matter remitted to the Chief Umpire (or designate) to decide that the appeal from the Board of Review should be dismissed; one set of costs awarded to the applicant.
Legal Topics
Standard of Review, Mixed Fact and Law, Judicial Review, Regulatory Interpretation, Remittal
Source Language
en
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Security Labour Law Pensions/regulatory Law Standard of Review Mixed Fact and Law Judicial Review +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Todd Campbell

Applicant

The Attorney General of Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Under Federal Courts Act S.28(1)(m) Concerning the Employment Insurance Act / Federal Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Judicial Review; Remittal to Chief Umpire

  1. 1 Whether the Umpire applied the correct standard of review to a question of mixed fact and law
  2. 2 Whether the payment following winding up of the pension plan was caused by the sale of the plant or was an independent winding up under Regulation 36(19)(b)
  3. 3 Whether the Umpire impermissibly substituted his view for that of the Board of Review

Ratio Decidendi

The Umpire erred by failing to apply the reasonableness standard to the mixed fact and law issue and by substituting his view for that of the Board of Review; accordingly the application for judicial review is allowed, the Umpire's decision is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Chief Umpire (or designate) to decide that the appeal from the Board of Review should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review allowed; Umpire's decision set aside; matter remitted to the Chief Umpire (or designate) to decide that the appeal from the Board of Review should be dismissed; one set of costs awarded to the applicant.

Orders

  • Application for judicial review allowed
  • Decision of Umpire David G. Riche set aside