Federal Appeal

Public Law

Social programs

Employment insurance

Applicant’s arguments raised disagreements with application of settled principles to facts of her case

Judicial review. Social Security Tribunal-General Division (SST-GD) found that applicant was not entitled to receive employment insurance (EI) benefits as she left her employment without just cause because there were reasonable alternatives open to her before resigning. Social Security Tribunal-Appeal Division (SST-AD) dismissed applicant’s appeal because SST-GD did not fail to observe natural justice and did not err in fact or law. Applicant brought application for judicial review. Application dismissed. Decision of SST-AD was reasonable because it was not open to it to intervene in light of s. 58 of Department of Employment and Social Development Act. Applicant’s arguments, that she had just cause to leave employment due to systemic sex-based harassment or had reasonable assurance of other employment, sought to have her case re-decided on merits, which was not role of court. As applicant’s arguments raised disagreement with application of settled principles to facts of her case, it was reasonable for SST-AD to dismiss her appeal. 

Cameron v. Canada (Attorney General) (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 2712, 2018 FCA 100, D.G. Near J.A., Mary J.L. Gleason J.A., and J.B. Laskin J.A. (F.C.A.).

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?