W. W. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

W. W. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Commission failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the appellant engaged in willful misconduct: evidence showed appellant followed long-standing housekeeping practice regarding items found in garbage, lacked intent to deprive, video did not show concealment, and the written policy was ambiguous as to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 SSTGDEI 61
Parties
Appellant: W. W.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Added Party (employer): Strathcona Hotel of Victoria
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Rehearing After Appeal Division Remittal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; appellant reinstated to Employment Insurance benefits; Commission did not prove misconduct under s.30 EI Act.
Legal Topics
Employment Insurance, Misconduct, Overpayment, Lost and Found Policy, Burden of Proof, Credibility
Source Language
english
Employment Law Administrative Law Social Security Law Employment Insurance Misconduct Overpayment Lost and Found Policy Burden of Proof +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W. W.

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Strathcona Hotel of Victoria

Added Party (employer)

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Appeal / General Division Rehearing After Appeal Division Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant was disqualified from EI benefits for misconduct under s.30 of the EI Act
  2. 2 Whether taking a backpack constituted theft
  3. 3 Whether breach of the employer's lost and found policy constituted willful misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

Commission failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the appellant engaged in willful misconduct: evidence showed appellant followed long-standing housekeeping practice regarding items found in garbage, lacked intent to deprive, video did not show concealment, and the written policy was ambiguous as to garbage items; breach was not willful and thus did not meet s.30 EI Act misconduct threshold; appeal allowed and benefits reinstated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; appellant reinstated to Employment Insurance benefits; Commission did not prove misconduct under s.30 EI Act.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Appellant reinstated to Employment Insurance benefits