IN THE MATTER of the EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
- and -
IN THE MATTER of a claim by
ROBERT COLLINSON
- and -
IN THE MATTER of an appeal to an Umpire by the
claimant from a decision by the Board of Referees
given on March 18, 1999, at Regina, Saskatchewan
DECISION
ROULEAU, J.
This is an appeal by the claimant from a decision of a Board of Referees rendered on March 18, 1999. The decision was communicated to the claimant on the same day. Mr. Collinson's appeal to the Umpire from the Board's decision was received by the Commission on February 9, 2000, which is outside the sixty day appeal period contemplated by section 116 of the Employment Insurance Act. That section reads as follows:
116. The appeal must be brought in the prescribed manner within 60 days after the decision is communicated to the person bringing the appeal, or any longer period that the umpire may allow for special reasons.
The jurisprudence has established that "special reasons" for a delay in launching an appeal to the Umpire include compassionate reasons or circumstances which are beyond the claimant's control. However, ignorance of the appeal process, forgetfulness or simple negligence do not constitute "special reasons."
In the present case, the claimant's reason for the delay in launching his appeal to the Umpire is that after reading the Board's decision, he believed that he had won his appeal. He maintains that it was not until he received a notice from the Commission on January 26, 2000, that he realized there was an outstanding amount for an overpayment and penalty. He filed his appeal to the Umpire a few days after receiving the notice.
I am satisfied that the circumstances here warrant an extension of the appeal period. It is true that the Board of Referees allowed Mr. Collinson's appeal with respect to the penalties imposed on him for false and misleading statements and directed that the penalties should be eliminated. The claimant incorrectly assumed that the Board's decision included the overpayment of benefits. This was an honest and understandable error on his part.
His misunderstanding was augmented by the fact that the Commission had suspended collection action on the overpayment and penalty amounts pending resolution of the claimant's appeal to the Board of Referees. After removing the penalties in accordance with the Board's decision, the Commission overlooked re-instating the collection action on the overpayment until January 26, 2000. This was when Mr. Collinson finally realized that his appeal to the Board had only been successful in part and he immediately took action and filed his appeal to the Umpire.
This is not a situation where the claimant's delay was caused by negligence or ignorance of the appeal process. It was the result of honest confusion compounded by the Commission's oversight. There are clearly circumstances here over which the claimant had no control. The fair and appropriate course is to allow the appeal to proceed.
For these reasons, I am granting an extension of the sixty day limit prescribed by section 116 of the Employment Insurance Act.
"P. ROULEAU"
UMPIRE
OTTAWA, Ontario
April 25, 2000