Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20020212

Docket: A-595-00

Montréal, Quebec, February 12, 2002

Coram:      DESJARDINS J.A.

DÉCARY J.A.

NOËL J.A.

BETWEEN:

GILBERT MERCIER

Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

JUDGMENT

The application for judicial review is allowed with costs, the decision of the umpire reversed and the matter is referred back to the chief umpire or to an umpire designated by him to be again decided on the basis that the appeal brought by the Commission from the board of referees' decision should be dismissed.

Alice Desjardins

line

                                    J.A.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L


Date: 20020212

Docket: A-595-00

Neutral reference: 2002 FCA 63

CORAM: DESJARDINS J.A.

DÉCARY J.A.

NOËL J.A.

BETWEEN:

GILBERT MERCIER

Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec on February 12, 2002

Judgment from the bench at Montréal, Quebec on February 12, 2002

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                                    DÉCARY J.A.


Date: 20020212

Docket: A-595-00

Neutral reference: 2002 FCA 63

CORAM: DESJARDINS J.A.

DÉCARY J.A.

NOËL J.A.

BETWEEN:

GILBERT MERCIER

Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec

on February 12, 2002)

DÉCARY J.A.

[1]        We consider that the evidence in the record allowed the board of referees to conclude that the Employment Insurance Commission ("the Commission") was not able to establish the scheduled date for return to work and so to find that the ineligibility resulting from s. 36(1) of the Employment Insurance Act was inapplicable to casual employees. The umpire therefore had no reason to substitute his own finding of fact for that of the board.


[2]        This application for judicial review will be allowed with costs, the decision of the umpire reversed and the matter referred back to the chief umpire or to an umpire designated by him to be again decided on the basis that the appeal brought by the Commission from the board of referees' decision should be dismissed.

[3]        It was agreed that the fate of this case would determine that of cases A-593-00 (Gatien Dugal and the Attorney General of Canada), A-594-00 (Laurier Mercier and the Attorney General of Canada), A-596-00 (Paul-Émile Huard and the Attorney General of Canada), A-597-00 (Adrien Moreau and the Attorney General of Canada) and A-599-00 (Guy Blais and the Attorney General of Canada). A copy of these reasons will accordingly be included in each of the said cases to have effect as reasons in support of the judgments rendered in each one, except that costs will only be awarded to the applicant in the case at bar.

Robert Décary

line

                                    J.A.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L


             FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                          APPEAL DIVISION

                                                               Date: 20020212

                                                            Docket: A-595-00

Between:

GILBERT MERCIER

                                                                           Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                                       Respondent

line

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

line


                                                    FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                                                 APPEAL DIVISION

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

FILE:                                                                               A-595-00

CORAM:                                                                         DESJARDINS J.A.

DÉCARY J.A.

NOËL J.A.

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                     GILBERT MERCIER

Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                                                  February 12, 2002

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: DÉCARY J.A.

DATED:                                                                           February 12, 2002

APPEARANCES:

Jean-Guy Ouellet                                                               FOR THE APPLICANT

Paul Deschênes                                                                 FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Ouellet, Nadon & Associés                                              FOR THE APPLICANT

Montréal, Quebec

Morris Rosenberg                                                              FOR THE RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Montréal, Quebec

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.