Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20040304

Docket: A-147-03

Citation: 2004 FCA 90

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

                                                                       RAJ PANNU

Applicant

                                                                                 and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on March 3, 2004.

Judgment delivered at Toronto, Ontario, on March 4, 2004.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                                                              ROTHSTEIN J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                                                                                                     PELLETIER J.A.

                                                                                                                                 MALONE J.A.


Date: 20040304

Docket: A-147-03

Citation: 2004 FCA 90

CORAM:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

PELLETIER J.A.

MALONE J.A.

BETWEEN:

RAJ PANNU

Applicant

                                                                                 and

                                                                                   

                                                                                   

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ROTHSTEIN J.A.


[1]                 This is a judicial review of a decision of an Umpire under the Employment Insurance Act. The Employment Insurance Commission denied the applicant 15 weeks sickness benefits because she had accumulated no hours of insurable employment during her extended qualifying period. The Board of Referees dismissed her appeal and the Umpire in turn also dismissed her appeal.

[2]                 This Court must also dismiss her application for judicial review. The Employment Insurance Act requires that a claimant for sickness benefits accumulate a minimum number of insurable hours of employment in her qualifying period. The applicant has not done so.

[3]                 The applicant's complaint is really against the Employment Insurance Act. She says she has contributed during her entire period of employment and that it is unfair that she should be denied her sickness benefits now. However, the Employment Insurance Act is an insurance plan and like other insurance plans, claimants must meet the conditions of the plan to obtain benefits. In this case, the applicant does not meet those conditions and is therefore not entitled to benefits.

[4]                 While the applicant's case is a sympathetic one, the Court cannot rewrite the Employment Insurance Act to accommodate her.

[5]                 The application for judicial review should be dismissed.

    "Marshall Rothstein"

line

                                                                                                                                                                  J.A.                          

"I agree

J. D. Denis Pelletier"

"I agree

B. Malone"


FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                              A-147-03

STYLE OF CAUSE:              RAJ PANNU

                                                                                                                                                         Applicant

and

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

                                                                                                                                                     Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:                      TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:                        MARCH 3, 2004

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT:        ROTHSTEIN J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                       PELLETIER J.A

MALONE J.A.

DATED:                                                 MARCH 4, 2004

APPEARANCES:

Ms. Raj Pannu

FOR THE APPLICANT,

ON HER OWN BEHALF       

Ms. Sharon McGovern

FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:                       

Raj Pannu

Mississauga, Ontario

FOR THE APPLICANT,

ON HER OWN BEHALF

Morris Rosenberg                                                       

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Toronto, Ontario

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.