On this page
Decision
[1] On June 24, 2014, a member of the General Division determined that the appeal of the Appellant from the previous determination of the Commission should be dismissed. In due course, the Appellant filed an application requesting leave to appeal to the Appeal Division.
[2] Subsection 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act states that the only grounds of appeal are that:
- (a) The General Division failed to observe a principle of natural justice or otherwise acted beyond or refused to exercise its jurisdiction;
- (b) The General Division erred in law in making its decision, whether or not the error appears on the face of the record; or
- (c) The General Division based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it.
[3] The Act also states that leave to appeal is to be refused if the appeal has “no reasonable chance of success”.
[4] In her application, the Appellant re-states many of the arguments she made before the General Division and objects to a number of their factual findings. Although she references the above grounds of appeal, she is essentially asking that I re-hear the case and come to a conclusion different from that already rendered by the General Division member.
[5] The role of the Appeal Division is to determine if a reviewable error set out in ss. 58(1) of the Act has been made by the General Division and if so to provide a remedy for that error. In the absence of such a reviewable error, the law does not permit the Appeal Division to intervene. It is not our role to re-hear the case de novo.
[6] In order to have a reasonable chance of success, the Appellant must explain how at least one reviewable error has been made by the General Division. Having failed to do so, this application for leave to appeal does not have a reasonable chance of success and must be refused.