Employment Insurance (EI)

Decision

[1] Leave to appeal is refused. The appeal will not proceed.

Overview

[2] The Applicant (Claimant) asked for the Employment Insurance (EI) benefits put in place by the Canada Emergency Response Benefits program (CERB) after losing his job because of Covid-19. He declared on his application that he was receiving, for the same period, Quebec Parental Insurance Plan (QPIP) benefits. He did not declare those earnings on his biweekly declarations.

[3] One year later, the Respondent (Commission) sent him a letter saying he should not have received EI benefits because he was receiving, for the same period, QPIP benefits. The Claimant contested this decision, mentioning nothing on the Service Canada’s website mentioned that he could not receive CERB while receiving QPIP. Upon reconsideration, the Commission maintained its initial decision. The Claimant appealed the reconsideration decision to the General Division.

[4] The General Division found that the law indicates that claimants are not eligible to receive CERB benefits if they receive allowances, money or other benefits paid under a provincial plan because their caring for one or more of their newborn children. It determined that the Claimant was not eligible to receive CERB benefits because he was already receiving QPIP benefits. The General Division concluded that the Claimant must reimburse the CERB benefits received.

[5] The Claimant now seeks leave to appeal of the General Division’s decision to the Appeal Division. He submits that he declared in his application that he was receiving QPIP benefits. He puts forward that the Service Canada website does not mention that claimants are not eligible to receive CERB benefits because they are already receiving QPIP benefits. The Claimant argues that the Government of Canada forgives CERB debts when the information given is unclear.

[6] I must decide whether there is some reviewable error of the General Division upon which the appeal might succeed.

[7] I am refusing leave to appeal because the Claimant’s appeal has no reasonable chance of success.

Issue

[8] Does the Claimant raise some reviewable error of the General Division upon which the appeal might succeed?

Analysis

[9] Section 58(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act specifies the only grounds of appeal of a General Division decision. These reviewable errors are that:

1. The General Division hearing process was not fair in some way.
2. The General Division did not decide an issue that it should have decided. Or, it decided something it did not have the power to decide.
3. The General Division based its decision on an important error of fact.
4. The General Division made an error of law when making its decision.

[10] An application for leave to appeal is a preliminary step to a hearing on the merits. It is an initial hurdle for the Claimant 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 Claimant does not have to prove his case but must establish that the appeal has a reasonable chance of success based on a reviewable error. In other words, that there is arguably some reviewable error upon which the appeal might succeed.

[11] Therefore, before I can grant leave, I need to be satisfied that the reasons for appeal fall within any of the above-mentioned grounds of appeal and that at least one of the reasons has a reasonable chance of success.

Does the Claimant raise some reviewable error of the General Division upon which the appeal might succeed?

[12] In support of his application for leave to appeal, the Claimant submits that he declared in his application that he was receiving QPIP benefits. He puts forward that the Service Canada website does not mention that claimants are not eligible to receive CERB benefits because they are already receiving QPIP benefits. The Claimant argues that the Government of Canada forgives CERB debts when the information given is unclear.

[13] As stated by the General Division, the law indicates that claimants are not eligible for CERB benefits while in receipt of QPIP.^{Footnote 1}

[14] Since the website does not purport to deal with the specifics of every person’s particular situation, claimants cannot reasonably treat information on it as if it were personally provided to them by an agent in response to an inquiry about their eligibility on given facts.^{Footnote 2} A reasonable person would have contacted the Commission in the Claimant’s circumstances considering that he was already receiving QPIP benefits for the same period. The Claimant admitted that he did not contact Service Canada to know how to declare his QPIP benefits.

[15] Furthermore, claimants who receives money to which they are not entitled, even as a result of a mistake by the Commission, are not excused from having to repay it.^{Footnote 3}

[16] I must reiterate that the emergency legislation does not allow discrepancy and does not give the Tribunal discretion in its application.^{Footnote 4}

[17] I understand that the Claimant declared in his application for CERB benefits that he was receiving QPIP benefits. The fact remains that neither the General Division nor the Appeal Division has the authority to deviate from the rules Parliament established for granting benefits.

[18] After reviewing the appeal docket and the General Division’s decision as well as considering the Claimant’s arguments in support of his request for leave to appeal, I have no choice but to find that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success.

Conclusion

[19] Leave to appeal is refused. This means the appeal will not proceed.