X v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and AM

X v Canada Employment Insurance Commission and AM

The General Division found that the employer proved on a balance of probabilities that the claimant made disrespectful, reckless comments about the owner on an employer-provided messaging platform which eroded trust and could interfere with her duties; even though time theft was not proven, the insubordinate communications were wilful/reckless misconduct that disqualified the claimant from EI benefits.

Citation
2024 SST 1084
Parties
Appellant: X; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Added Party (claimant): A. M.
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance / General Division Reconsideration Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claimant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits.
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Disqualification From Benefits, Insubordination, Time Theft, Expectation of Privacy, Wrongful Dismissal
Source Language
English
Employment Insurance Labour Law Privacy Misconduct Disqualification From Benefits Insubordination Time Theft Expectation of Privacy +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Appellant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

A. M.

Added Party (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance / General Division Reconsideration Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the claimant lose her job because of misconduct?
  2. 2 Was the alleged time theft proven?
  3. 3 Did the claimant have a reasonable expectation of privacy in employer-provided messaging?

Ratio Decidendi

The General Division found that the employer proved on a balance of probabilities that the claimant made disrespectful, reckless comments about the owner on an employer-provided messaging platform which eroded trust and could interfere with her duties; even though time theft was not proven, the insubordinate communications were wilful/reckless misconduct that disqualified the claimant from EI benefits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claimant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; claimant disqualified from receiving Employment Insurance benefits.