Employment Insurance (EI)

Reasons and decision

Decision

[1] The Social Security Tribunal of Canada (Tribunal) grants leave to appeal before the Tribunal’s Appeal Division.

Introduction

[2] On March 31, 2017, the Tribunal’s General Division found that the Respondent was justified in voluntarily leaving her employment within the meaning of sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act (Act).

[3] The Applicant filed an application for leave to appeal to the Appeal Division on April 21, 2017.

Issue

[4] The Tribunal must decide whether the appeal has a reasonable chance of success.

The law

[5] According to subsections 56(1) and 58(3) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (DESD Act), “An appeal to the Appeal Division may only be brought if leave to appeal is granted” and “The Appeal Division must either grant or refuse leave to appeal.”

[6] Subsection 58(2) of the DESD Act provides that leave to appeal is refused if the Appeal Division is satisfied that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success.

Analysis

[7] According to subsection 58(1) of DESD Act, the only grounds of appeal are the following:

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.

[8] The application for leave to appeal is a preliminary step to a hearing on the merits. It is an initial hurdle for the Applicant to meet, but it is lower than the one that must be met on the hearing of the appeal on the merits. At the leave to appeal stage, the Applicant does not have to prove her case.

[9] The Tribunal will grant leave to appeal if it is satisfied that any of the above‑mentioned grounds of appeal has a reasonable chance of success.

[10] This means that the Tribunal must, in accordance with subsection 58(1) of the DESD Act, be able to see a question of law, fact or jurisdiction, the answer to which may justify setting aside the decision under review.

[11] In light of the foregoing, does the Applicant’s appeal have a reasonable chance of success?

[12] In its application for leave to appeal, the Applicant argues that the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that subparagraph 29(c)(vi) requires reasonable assurance of another employment in the immediate future. To meet these requirements, a claimant must have an offer of employment, know what employment he or she will occupy, know where he or she will work and know when the employment will begin. In this case, the Applicant argues that none of these requirements was satisfied.

[13] The Applicant argues that the General Division’s decision does not account for the relevant case law. It ultimately submits that the General Division based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact that it had made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it.

[14] Upon review of the appeal file, the General Division’s decision and the arguments in support of the application for leave to appeal, the Tribunal finds that the appeal has a reasonable chance of success. The Applicant has raised several questions relating to the General Division’s interpretation and application of subparagraph 29(c)(vi) of the Act, the answers to which may justify setting aside the decision under review.

Conclusion

[15] The Tribunal grants leave to appeal.