UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE |
Velez v. Canada (Attorney General)
A-20-00
2001 FCA 343, Strayer J.A.
6/11/01
4 pp.
Application for judicial review of Umpire's decision--Applicant quit job at Classics Cars to go to work in husband's business--Applied for employment insurance benefits on November 27, 1995, collected 42 weeks of benefits--Commission ruling applicant not entitled to benefits received as self-employed in business during benefit period--Board of Referees dismissing applicant's appeal on basis on evidence applicant involved in running business of Laserseal Insulating Glass Ltd.--Applicant appealed to Umpire--Umpire refusing to receive further evidence--Applicant seeking judicial review of Umpire's decision because of refusal to receive further evidence with respect to: (1) minor nature of applicant's involvement in husband's business; (2) reason why corporation operated in her name; and (3) allegation of applicant sought to put in evidence before Board with respect to job search--Umpire correct to refuse admission of new evidence on merits as described in items (1), (2)--Unemployment Insurance Act, s. 86 only allowing him to receive evidence of "new facts"--Evidence not constituting "new facts" as existed prior to Board of Referees hearing, should have been presented at that time--Umpire erred in refusing to receive evidence Board of Referees had refused to allow applicant to put in evidence before it of job search--While properly refusing to hear new evidence on merits, Umpire obliged to consider evidence as to fairness of Board hearing--This constituted "new facts" as it could not have been available before Board hearing--Application allowed--Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. U-1, s. 86.