Date: 19990604
Docket: A-704-97
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE
DÉCARY, J.A.
ROTHSTEIN, J.A.
BETWEEN:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
- and -
VIRGINIA PARTRIDGE
Respondent
Heard at Edmonton (Alberta) on Friday, June 4, 1999.
Judgment delivered from the Bench on June 4, 1999.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY: DÉCARY J.A.
Date: 19990604
Docket: A-704-97
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE
DÉCARY, J.A.
ROTHSTEIN, J.A.
BETWEEN:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Applicant
- and -
VIRGINIA PARTRIDGE
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(Delivered from the Bench at Edmonton on June 4, 1999)
DÉCARY J.A.
[1] The respondent is a teacher. She applied for unemployment insurance benefits on June 10, 1993 subsequent to being laid off for shortage of work effective June 30, 1993. She was recalled on July 12, 1993, effective July 12, 1993, for a permanent half-time teaching assignment commencing September 7, 1993.
[2] On September 3, 1993 the Commission advised the respondent that she was not entitled to benefits from July 12, 1993 to September 6, 1993 because that period fell within the non-teaching period as defined by section 46.1 of the Unemployment Insurance Regulations. The Commission did not question the respondent's entitlement between July 4 and July 12 and that period is not in issue.
[3] The respondent appealed the Commission's decision to the Board of Referee, which dismissed the appeal.
[4] The Umpire found in favour of the respondent. He was of the view that as the respondent's employment had been terminated on June 30, 1993 and there was no evidence before him that the respondent had been paid from July 12 to September 6, 1993, she was entitled to benefits.
[5] The Umpire's decision cannot stand. He erred, in our view, in not considering the applicable legislation and the collective agreement. On July 12, 1993, the respondent accepted an employment contract which for all practical purposes was retroactive to July 1, 1993. According to the School Act of British Columbia (S.B.C. chap. 61 s.1) the "school year" commenced on July 1, 1993, and ended on June 30, 1994. According to the respondent's collective agreement, her annual salary was paid for the entire school year. There is no evidence suggesting that the respondent was not paid for the period at issue. To allow the respondent to collect unemployment benefits form July 12, 1993 until the start of her teaching period in early September would effectively allow her to be doubly compensated for that period of time (see Gauthier v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commissioner)1, Canada (Attorney General) v. St.Coeur2, Canada (Attorney General) v. Hann3 and Ying v. Canada (Attorney General)4).
[6] The application for judicial review will be allowed, the decision of the Umpire will be set aside and the matter will be remitted to the Chief Umpire or his delegate for reconsideration on the basis that the claimant's appeal from the decision of the Board of Referees must be dismissed.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
__________________1 (1995) A-128-95, unreported.
2 (1996), 199 N.R. 45 (F.C.A.).