• Home >
  • Jurisprudence Library
  • CUB 37132

    IN THE MATTER of the UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT

    - and -

    IN THE MATTER of a claim by
    TRENT PIRCH

    - and -

    IN THE MATTER of an appeal to an Umpire by the claimant from decisions by the Board of Referees given on March 21, 1996, at Charlottetown, P.E.I.

    DECISION

    ROULEAU, J.

    This is an appeal from the decisions of a Board of Referees issued on March 21, 1996 with respect to three different periods of employment. The claimant's appeal was received by the Commission on September 23, 1996, beyond the 60 day appeal period contemplated by section 82 of the Unemployment Insurance Act.

    Section 82 reads as follows:

    82. An appeal from a decision of a board of referees must be brought within sixty days after
    (a) the day the decision is communicated to the claimant, or
    (b) the earlier of the day that the decision is communicated
    to the claimant and the day that the decision is communicated to the employer, if the decision is communicated to both the claimant and the employer,

    or such longer period as the umpire may in any case for
    special reasons allow.

    The jurisprudence provides that delays have been allowed for compassionate reasons or for reasons beyond the claimant's control. Ignorance of the appeal process, forgetfulness or simple negligence do not constitute "special reasons."

    In his letter of appeal, the claimant explained that his delay was due to the fact that he was waiting to hear from other people on what he should do. He stated that he had contacted his Federal MP's office in March and they had recently advised him to appeal to the Umpire.

    The delay in this case is of approximately four months. A review of the material on file reveals that this claimant intended to appeal from the day he received the decision of the Board of Referees. In March, 1996, he sought advice from his Member of Parliament who did not reply to him until September, 1996. On September 23, 1996, acting on the advice of his MP, Mr. Pirch filed his appeal to the Umpire.

    In this particular case, I am satisfied that the claimant acted in good faith and I hereby allow the appeal to proceed on the merits before an Umpire.

    "P. ROULEAU"

    UMPIRE

    OTTAWA, Ontario
    February 28, 1997

    2011-01-10