IN THE MATTER OF THE EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
- and -
in the matter of a claim for benefit by
MANSSOR MASHAIKHI
- and -
IN THE MATTER of an appeal by the Claimant
from a decision of a Board of Referees given at
Mississauga, Ontario, on the 16th day of May, 2000
DECISION
Hon. David G. Riche
The appellant was a 44 year old man who quit his job as a security officer on the 12th of March, 2000. He told the Commission that he wanted new skills before it was too late so that he could gain employment as soon as possible (Exhibit 4.1). He explained to the Commission that he was interested in enrolling in a computer course. Since he was working afternoons and evenings it was not possible to take such a course while working (Exhibit 6.1).
The appellant gave a detailed account of his medical problems which leave him with insufficient energy to do both a job and a course. He stated that his reason for quitting was to give him the time to research training courses that would enable him to get a more skilled job with better pay. He was not enrolled in a course at the time he quit and has as yet not enrolled in any. The Board found that the appellant's desire to upgrade his skills did not constitute just cause.
The claimant explained to me that during his hearing he felt he did not have a full opportunity to present his case. The claimant had had a bone marrow transplant which had left him with supposedly less energy than he had before. He did not, however, present any medical evidence to the Board. He stated that he was cut off in his presentation and was interrupted while trying to give evidence before the Board.
It seemed to me that the claimant was an honest and straightforward person and was of a personality that could be intimidated while appearing before the Board. I was rather concerned that the claimant was interrupted in his presentation and may not have had a full opportunity to present his case. This in my view is a denial of natural justice. In these circumstances, I believe that it is necessary that this matter be returned to a new Board of Referees for a hearing with specific instructions to give the claimant a full opportunity to present his appeal and his evidence.
The appeal is therefore allowed and a new hearing ordered.
David G. Riche
UMPIRE
March 25, 2001
St. John's, Newfoundland