Canada Case Law

van den Berg (Re)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The bankrupt failed to discharge statutory duties and did not demonstrate that his debts arose from circumstances beyond his responsibility or satisfactorily account for prior assets; the vehicle insurance net proceeds are a non-exempt asset of the estate and the unpaid trustee fee balance is owing; therefore under ss.172(2)(c) and 173 the court refuses discharge with leave to re-apply upon full compliance, and sets payment, interest and assignment conditions to protect creditors and uphold system integrity.

Source excerpt

• Discharge of bankrupt
• Trustee remuneration
• Non-exempt assets
• Insurance proceeds
• S.173 grounds for refusal
• Statutory duties of bankrupt

Read case analysis

Ntibarimungu v. DoorDash Technology Canada Inc.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court stayed a civil claim against DoorDash, finding the plaintiff had assented to the ICA by electronic clicks and that the arbitration clause covered the dispute.

• Stay of proceedings
• Arbitration clause enforceability
• Electronic contract formation
• Unconscionability
• Opt‑out provisions
• Statutory exceptions under s.7(2)

Read case analysis

TM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

Member found that coworkers’ remarks were discriminatory and created a hostile work environment that caused credible psychological injury to the appellant given his history as a Syrian war survivor; his fear and impairment made remediation unreasonable and his later attempt to return for financial survival did not negate that he had no reasonable alternative at the time, therefore he had just cause and is not disqualified from EI benefits.

Source excerpt

• Voluntary leaving
• Just cause
• Discrimination
• Hostile work environment
• Psychological injury
• Reasonable alternative

Read case analysis

TM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The appellant had reasonable alternatives to quitting (seek medical care, request accommodations, raise concerns with the employer, or continue the part‑time work while seeking other employment); he therefore failed to prove he had no reasonable alternative and did not establish just cause, so he is disqualified from EI benefits under the Employment Insurance Act.

Source excerpt

• Voluntary leaving
• Just cause
• Reasonable alternatives to quitting
• Concurrent employment
• Disqualification from benefits
• Workplace discrimination

Read case analysis

DM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Tribunal found that the appellant had reasonable alternatives to quitting (could have sought and arranged new employment or negotiated start dates), the discrimination allegations were neither raised in earlier administrative stages nor independently corroborated, and the claimed notice obligation was unproven; therefore the appellant did not establish just cause and is disqualified from EI benefits.

Source excerpt

• Voluntary leaving
• Just cause
• Reasonable alternative to quitting
• Hours of work
• Notice period
• Discrimination allegation

Read case analysis

AM v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The General Division correctly identified and applied the law on voluntary leaving and just cause, considered the statutory factors and evidence, concluded the claimant had reasonable alternatives to quitting, found no evidentiary basis that age discrimination caused the departure, and thus made no jurisdictional or legal error; the Appeal Division must dismiss the appeal because it cannot reweigh evidence or substitute its view for the General Division.

Source excerpt

• Voluntary leaving
• Just cause
• Reasonable alternatives
• Error of law
• Jurisdictional error
• Age discrimination allegation

Read case analysis

RC v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The appellant did not voluntarily leave; he was terminated as a result of the employer’s personal decision unrelated to his job performance or wilful misconduct. The Commission failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the appellant’s conduct constituted misconduct for purposes of the EI Act; therefore the disqualification is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

Source excerpt

• Misconduct
• Voluntary leave/quit
• Just cause
• Discrimination/harassment
• Ei benefits disqualification

Read case analysis

RD v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Commission failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the claimant's conduct amounted to wilful misconduct because (1) the lifting did not constitute a transfer between surfaces under the employer's policies and therefore did not breach the mechanical lift requirement, (2) the employer's policy allowed discretion and was not a true zero tolerance rule, and (3) common workplace practice and supervisory directions made dismissal unforeseeable to the claimant; accordingly the claimant is not disqualified from EI.

Source excerpt

• Misconduct
• Denial of benefits
• Reason for dismissal
• Employer policy interpretation
• Disability accommodation

Read case analysis

Curic v. Rainbow’s End Housing Co-operative

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to reactivate an inactive appeal and granted a s. 29 order preventing further proceedings without leave.

• Inactive list
• Removal from inactive list
• Leave to commence proceedings
• Vexatious litigant order
• Limitation period
• No-fees application

Read case analysis

GG v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Appeal Division held the General Division erred in law by dismissing the claimant's Charter challenge as non-compliant with section 20(1)(a) because the claimant's submissions, although unsophisticated, met the filing requirements; the matter is remitted to the General Division for reconsideration of the Charter issue.

Source excerpt

• Sickness benefits
• Conversion to regular benefits
• Charter challenge
• Section 20(1)(a) sst regulations
• Section 18 ei act
• Section 15 charter

Read case analysis