Disagreement with outcome did not meet test for granting leave to appeal

Penalty. Applicant employee applied for Employment Insurance (EI) benefits following separation with his regular seasonal employment, but did not report his vacation pay. Canada Employment Insurance Commission determined that there was overpayment of $875 and that employee had knowingly made false or misleading statements. Commission noted that this was second incident of improper reporting and imposed penalty of $875, but on reconsideration reduced this to $656. Social Security Tribunal General Division dismissed employee's appeal. Social Security Tribunal Appeal Division dismissed employee's application for leave to appeal. Employee brought application for judicial review. Application dismissed. Argument regarding penalty being assessed for more because of it being second infraction had no reasonable chance of success. Employee's explanation of providing incorrect answers as result of not knowing about vacation pay was not sufficient to not have sanctions imposed. Employee's explanation that Commission should have known about vacation pay from record of employment could not succeed, as employee had always informed Commission of vacation pay in past. Fact that employee did not report vacation pay to Commission supported that he knowingly made false statement. Disagreement with outcome did not meet test for granting leave to appeal. It was reasonable to find that employee would have no reasonable chance of success on appeal.

Ibrahim v. Canada (Attorney General) (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 1488, 2019 CarswellNat 2313, 2019 FC 499, 2019 CF 499, Glennys L. McVeigh J. (F.C.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca