Employment Insurance (EI)

Decision

[1] On April 17, 2015, a member of the General Division determined that the appeal of the Applicant from the previous determination of the Commission should be dismissed. In due course, the Applicant filed an application for leave to appeal to the Appeal Division.

[2] Subsection 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (DESDA) states that the only grounds of appeal are that:

1. (a) the General Division failed to observe a principle of natural justice or otherwise acted beyond or refused to exercise its jurisdiction;
2. (b) the General Division erred in law in making its decision, whether or not the error appears on the face of the record; or
3. (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 DESDA also states that leave to appeal is to be refused if the appeal has “no reasonable chance of success”.

[4] In his initial application for leave to appeal, the Applicant simply repeated the arguments he made in writing to the General Division.

[5] This is not a ground of appeal according to the DESDA.

[6] Noting that the Applicant’s appeal was not complete because the grounds of appeal were not sufficiently detailed, I requested that the Applicant (and the Commission) file further submissions.

[7] In response, the Applicant submitted a letter which for the first time alleged that he did not receive the notice of hearing because (at his request) it had been mailed to his friend. He further alleged that his phone had been disconnected, and that he had not been informed by his friend of the notice.

[8] Although I observe (as did the General Division member) that he Applicant, as evidenced by the Canada Post signature page, appears to have personally signed for the notice of hearing, I am prepared to accept that this new ground of appeal raised by the Applicant could ground a successful appeal.

[9] For this reason, I find that this appeal has a reasonable chance of success and that leave to appeal must be granted.

[10] I will expect the Applicant, in writing and in advance of any hearing, to explain the above situation and to substantiate his claim.