• Home >
  • Jurisprudence Library
  • Federal Court Decision #A-592-99 - THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA v. LAROCQUE, REGINALD

    JUDGMENT OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

    Date:
    20010222

    Docket:
    A-592-99

    Citation:
    2001 FCA 29

    Umpire's Decision:
    CUB 45449;

    "TRANSLATION"

    CORAM :

    DÉCARY J.A.
    LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
    NOËL J.A.

    BETWEEN :

    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA,,

    plaintiff,

    -and-

    RÉGINALD LAROCQUE,

    defendant.

    Hearing held by teleconferencing at Ottawa, Ontario on Tuesday, February 20, 2001.

    REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
    (Judgment rendered at Ottawa, Ontario
    on Thursday, February 22, 2001) ;
    Rendered by

    DÉCARY J.A.:

    [1] In my opinion, this application for judicial review should be allowed.

    [2] The defendant's case is certainly deserving of sympathy, but the fact remains that the umpire misdirected himself on the law when he concluded that ruling against the defendant [TRANSLATION] "would be completely contrary to the spirit of this social legislation and would not do justice to this claimant".

    [3] The evidence actually showed that despite the termination of employment the defendant did not meet the conditions laid down by s. 14(1) of the Employment Insurance Regulations for there to be an interruption of earnings: that the insured cease to be employed by his employer and not work for his employer for a period of at least seven consecutive days after the termination.

    [4] In the case at bar the defendant continued rendering services to his employer and was in his employ during the week following his termination of employment. He was accordingly disqualified. In the circumstances, the umpire should have allowed the appeal by the Attorney General of Canada from the decision of the board of referees which reversed the Commission's decision.

    [5] The application for judicial review should therefore be allowed, the board of referees' decision set aside and the matter referred back to the Chief Umpire or his representative to be again decided on the basis that the Attorney General of Canada's appeal from the decision of the board of referees should be allowed.

    [6] As there was no application for costs, none will be awarded.



    "Robert Décary"
    J.A.



    "I concur.

    Gilles Létourneau J.A."

    "I concur.

    Marc Noël J.A."

    2011-01-10