Employment Insurance (EI)

Reasons and decision

Decision

[1] The appeal is allowed and the file is returned to the General Division of the Social Security Tribunal (Tribunal), Employment Insurance Section, for a new hearing.

Introduction

[2] On August 18, 2017, the General Division of the Tribunal determined that the Appellant had left her employment without just cause in accordance with sections 29 and 30 of the Employment Insurance Act (Act).

[3] The Appellant requested leave to appeal to the Appeal Division on September 18, 2017. Leave to appeal was granted on October 20, 2017.

Issue

[4] The Tribunal must decide whether the General Division erred when it concluded that the Appellant had left her employment without just cause in accordance with sections 29 and 30 of the Act.

The law

[5] Subsection 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (DESD Act) states that 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.

Analysis

[6] The Appellant submits that the General Division did not consider a significant part of the evidence concerning her final months of work. She puts forward that the Employment Insurance Act states that a voluntary departure must not be provoked by the employer. She submits that the evidence before the General Division shows that her employer was provoking her to leave her job. She argues that the General Division did not consider her evidence and submissions under subparagraph 29(c)(xiii) of the Act.

[7] The Respondent respectfully submits that the General Division erred in dismissing the appeal without clearly analyzing whether the Appellant had quit as a result of undue pressure by the employer. As such, the Respondent submits that the General Division erred by rendering a decision that was neither transparent nor intelligible. To this end, it also submits that the General Division’s decision may have been made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it.

[8] Therefore, the Respondent submits that the Appellant has grounds for appeal under subsection 58(1) of the DESD Act. As such, the Respondent asks the Appeal Division, pursuant to subsection 59(1) of the DESD Act, to return the case to the General Division for reconsideration.

[9] The Tribunal agrees with the parties and finds that the General Division did not clearly address and dispose of all the issues put forward by the Appellant and, in doing so, did not consider all the evidence before it.

[10] For the above-mentioned reasons, the Tribunal finds that the matter should be sent back to the General Division of the Tribunal (Employment Insurance Section) for a new hearing.

Conclusion

[11] The appeal is allowed. The case will be returned to the General Division of the Tribunal (Employment Insurance Section) for reconsideration by a new member.

[12] The Tribunal orders that the General Division decision dated August 18, 2017, be removed from the file.