EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE |
Canada (Attorney General) v. Bourgault
A-43-01
2003 FCA 44, Létourneau J.A.
29/1/03
3 pp.
Application for judicial review--Board of Referees not persuaded by respondent possible to combine work schedule with study schedule--Board also concluded, on basis of evidence, that claimant had not demonstrated genuine desire, past and future, to work while continuing studies--Umpire had no reason to intervene, as findings of fact by Board of Referees neither erroneous nor made in perverse or capricious manner--Umpire misdirected himself in law concerning impact of request by respondent to award her benefits for only three months--Benefit period, whether one defined by the Act or more limited one desired by claimant, irrelevant in determining and gauging availability of claimant, which must exist for any working day under Act, s. 18(a)--Relevant factor for purposes of determining availability was period of respondent's courses and studies, which Board of Referees rightly considered--Application allowed--Employment Insurance Act, S.C. 1996, c. 23, s. 18(a).