ML v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

ML v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Although the claimant voluntarily left her job, the evidence (credible testimony, medical note and the school's pre-entry letter) established she had no reasonable alternative because she became primary caregiver for immediate family members; care obligations therefore constituted just cause and the claimant is not disqualified from receiving EI benefits.

Citation
2019 SST 1763
Parties
Claimant: M. L.; Respondent/commission: Canada Employment Insurance Commission
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Commission decision reversed
Legal Topics
Voluntary Leaving, Just Cause, Family Obligations, Benefits Entitlement
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Social Benefits Voluntary Leaving Just Cause Family Obligations Benefits 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. L.

Claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent/commission

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the claimant voluntarily leave her job?
  2. 2 If so, did the claimant have just cause to leave voluntarily?
  3. 3 Whether care for immediate family constitutes just cause

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimant voluntarily left her job, the evidence (credible testimony, medical note and the school's pre-entry letter) established she had no reasonable alternative because she became primary caregiver for immediate family members; care obligations therefore constituted just cause and the claimant is not disqualified from receiving EI benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Commission decision reversed

Orders

  • The claimant is not disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits; original decision denying benefits is set aside