Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20040311

Docket: A-344-03

Citation: 2004 FCA 103

CORAM:        DÉCARY J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

NADON J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                              DANIEL LATOUR

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                           and

                                         THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                    Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on March 11, 2004.

                   Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on March 11, 2004.

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


Date: 20040311

Docket: A-344-03

Citation: 2004 FCA 103

CORAM:        DÉCARY J.A.

LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

NADON J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                              DANIEL LATOUR

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                           and

                                         THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

                     (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on March 11, 2004)

DÉCARY J.A.

[1]                The claimant was dismissed when his employer discovered, with supporting evidence, including a videocassette, that during sick leave the claimant had engaged in activities inconsistent with the disability which he claimed on the basis of a medical certificate.


[2]                The Board of Referees was of the view that if it "found that the claimant misled his employer and destroyed the relationship of trust between them, this would be equivalent to saying that the Board disputed the medical opinion in the appeal docket". The Board then determined that it was "not qualified to confirm or deny a medical diagnosis".

[3]                The Umpire was clearly correct to note that the Board had not responded to the question that it had been asked, namely whether the loss of employment was the result of the claimant's misconduct. The Umpire therefore was entitled to reconsider the matter and he did not make a reviewable error in finding that there had been misconduct within the meaning of section 30 of the Employment Insurance Act.

[4]                The application for judicial review will be dismissed with costs.

                "Robert Décary"             

                                                                                                                                                      J.A.

Certified true translation

Kelley A. Harvey, BA, BCL, LLB


                                                  FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                                                      SOLICITORS OF RECORD

                                                                                                                                                           

DOCKET:                                                         A-344-03

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                           DANIEL LATOUR

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                                                                                                          Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                         Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                                                           March 11, 2004

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:             (DÉCARY, LÉTOURNEAU, NADON, JJ.A.)

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DÉCARY

APPEARANCES:

William de Merchant

FOR THE APPLICANT

Pauline Leroux

FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:                                                                                                           

Ouillet, Nadon & Associés

Montréal, Quebec

FOR THE APPLICANT

Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Montréal, Quebec

FOR THE RESPONDENT


 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.