UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE |
Miller v. Canada (Attorney General)
A-137-01
2002 FCA 370, Rothstein, Evans and Malone JJ.A.
7/10/02
11 pp.
Judicial review of Umpire's decision under Unemployment Insurance Act, holding s. 11(6) not violating applicant's Charter, s. 15(1) rights--Applicant received 25 weeks' maternity and parental ("special") benefits--Position closed when applicant intended to resume work; applicant applied for regular benefits--Applicant entitled to 40 weeks of regular benefits but 25 weeks of special benefits deducted pursuant to statutory limitation in s. 11(6)(a)--Applicant arguing discrimination on basis of sex, family status, that she would be denied equal opportunity to look for alternative employment while receiving benefits--Court rejected similar challenge in Sollbach v. Canada (1999), 252 N.R. 137 (F.C.A.)--Case law on overruling prior decisions reviewed in Minister of Employment and Immigration v. Widmont, [1984] 2 F.C. 274 (C.A.)--Interests of certainty, consistency of law very high--Test for overruling decision of Court is that decision manifestly wrong, in that Court overlooked relevant statutory provision, or case that ought to have been followed--Court in Sollbach not neglecting relevant Charter case law, framed analysis correctly pursuant to Law v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 497--Law clarified approach to identifying group to which claimant should be compared in s. 15(1) analysis--Applicant in present case arguing Court erred in Sollbach by determining other recipients of special benefits constituted proper comparator group for applicant--Applicant not demonstrating Sollbach manifestly wrong for purposes of test for overruling judgment set out Widmont--Further considerations on overruling decisions in dissent in R. v. Bernard, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 833; advent of Charter, attenuation by subsequent case law, uncertainty of law--Sollbach decision post-Charter, not attenuated by subsequent case law, and not creating uncertainty re: s. 11(6)--Even if Sollbach wrongly decided, Court not persuaded compelling reasons to justify departure therefrom--Application dismissed--Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. U-1, ss. 11(6) (as am. by S.C.1990, c. 40, s. 9)--Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B, Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.K.) [R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 44], s. 15(1).