Date: 19980113
Docket: A-940-96
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
DESJARDINS J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
IN THE MATTER OF THE EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT,
S.C. 1996, C. 23
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION OF
THE HONOURABLE A.H. HOLLINGWORTH, UMPIRE,
DATED OCTOBER 30, 1996 AND RECEIVED BY THE
APPLICANT ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 1996, AFFIRMING
THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF REFEREES
DATED DECEMBER 19, 1995
BETWEEN:
ARI AGRONIN
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA AND
CANADA EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION COMMISSION
Respondents
Heard at Edmonton, Alberta, on Tuesday, January 13, 1998.
Judgment delivered from the Bench on Tuesday, January 13, 1998.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MARCEAU J.A.
Date: 19980113
Docket: A-940-96
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
DESJARDINS J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
IN THE MATTER OF THE EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT,
S.C. 1996, C. 23
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION OF
THE HONOURABLE A.H. HOLLINGWORTH, UMPIRE,
DATED OCTOBER 30, 1996 AND RECEIVED BY THE
APPLICANT ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 1996, AFFIRMING
THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF REFEREES
DATED DECEMBER 19, 1995
BETWEEN:
ARI AGRONIN
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA AND
CANADA EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION COMMISSION
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the Bench at Edmonton, Alberta,
on Tuesday, January 13, 1998)
MARCEAU J.A.
[1] In spite of the very able and well presented argument of counsel for the applicant, we have not been persuaded that this application should succeed.
[2] We are unable to see any breach of natural justice that could give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias in the manner in which this case was conducted in any of the jurisdictions below. More particularly, we see nothing wrong with the documentation that was placed before the Board of Referees whose decision was being considered by the umpire. The Board was obviously entitled to be made aware of the events of the case. The umpire was, therefore, right in analysing the case as involving a mere question of appreciation of the evidence and assessment of the credibility of witnesses. And he was obviously right in considering that, in such a case, the finding of the Board of Referees could be interfered with only in a case of palpable or overriding error affecting the assessment of the facts or, as expressed by the umpire, in a case of "egregious error". We can only uphold his conclusion that this was not such a case.
[3] The application will, therefore, be dismissed.
"Louis Marceau"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 19980113
Docket: A-940-96
IN THE MATTER OF THE EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT, S.C. 1996, C. 23
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE A.H. HOLLINGWORTH, UMPIRE, DATED OCTOBER 30, 1996 AND RECEIVED BY THE APPLICANT ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 1996, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF REFEREES DATED DECEMBER 19, 1995
BETWEEN:
ARI AGRONIN
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA AND
CANADA EMPLOYMENT AND IMMIGRATION
COMMISSION
Respondents
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT