These provisions confer on the Commission the statutory authority to reconsider any claim. They are the legal basis for the Commission's power to determine that benefits have been improperly paid, and to ask for repayment.
Calder v. M.E.I., [1980] 1 F.C. 842 (F.C.A.) A-233-79
Canada (A.G.) v. Laforest [1988], F.C.J. No. 546 (F.C.A.) A-607-87
The purpose of these provisions is to enable the Commission to proceed rapidly with the recovery of overpaid benefits and to impose its decision on claimants itself, subject only to an appeal to a Board of Referees.
Canada (A.G.) v. Laforest [1988], F.C.J. No. 546 (F.C.A.) A-607-87
In present-day administration of employment insurance cases, the Commission cannot check everything at the time it happens. It is precisely for this reason that the Act provides the Commission with between thirty-six and seventy-two months to retrace its steps and retroactively impose penalties.
Canada (A.G.) v. Landry, December 6, 1999, F.C.J. No. 1872 (F.C.A.) A-532-98
The Commission may reconsider a claim as often as required and whether or not any benefits have been paid on the claim.
Calder v. M.E.I., [1980] 1 F.C. 842 (F.C.A.) A-233-79
Fortin v. C.E.I.C. [1988] 21 F.T.R. 280 (F.C.T.D.) T-472-88
The legislative provisions for reconsideration of a claim and recovery of overpayment do not only apply to an initial claim for benefits. They also apply to the weekly claims for benefit made by a claimant. They are therefore, ongoing enforcement mechanisms which allow the Commission to examine, from week to week, errors or frauds that are brought to its attention.
Brien v. C.E.I.C., April 23, 1997, F.C.J. No. 492 (F.C.A.) A-425-96
A claimant's failure to appeal an unfavorable decision to a Board of Referees, has absolutely no relevance to the exercise by the Commission of its discretionary power to reconsider the claimant's application for benefits.
Gareau. v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission) [1986], F.C.J. No. 746 (F.C.A.) A-786-84
The power to reconsider a claim for benefits is a special power granted to the Commission. The Commission cannot be compelled to reconsider a claim for benefits and is not obliged to do so at the request of a claimant. However, it is obliged to consider the claimant's request for reconsideration and to decide whether or not to reconsider the claim.
Fortin v. C.E.I.C. [1988] 21 F.T.R. 280 (F.C.T.D.) T-472-88
Portelance v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission) [1990], 44 F.T.R. 215 (F.C.T.D.) T-1765-89
The authority conferred by the legislation on the Commission is not confined to the reconsideration of decisions, as such, but is an authority to reconsider "any claim" in respect of which benefit has been paid or should have been paid.
Calder v. M.E.I., [1980] 1 F.C. 842 (F.C.A.) A-233-79
Gareau. v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission) [1986], F.C.J. No. 746 (F.C.A.) A-786-84
Fortin v. C.E.I.C. [1988] 21 F.T.R. 280 (F.C.T.D.) T-472-88
The system created by these provisions for the recovery of benefits is an exceptional one and is a departure from the ordinary law. As such, the sections must be strictly construed. They give the Commission exceptional powers, in which it is both judge and jury, to determine its debt itself and recover it not only in the courts but, if necessary, to carry out the recovery itself, such as by set-off, filing its certificate in the Federal Court, claims on a third party which are a form of garnishment, and so on. These exceptional powers must be kept strictly within the limits and requirements specified by the Act, which includes the time limits for exercising them. They cannot be extended by judicial interpretation or by seeking to determine the alleged intentions of the legislator.
Canada (A.G.) v. Laforest [1988], F.C.J. No. 546 (F.C.A.) A-607-87
Canada (Employment Insurance Commission) v. Bentley, [2002] F.C.J. No. 171 (F.C.A.) A-546-00
Before the Commission can collect an overpayment of benefits it must take all of the following steps within three or six years of paying the benefit: it must reconsider the claim; make a decision to void the claim; calculate the amount due as an overpayment; and, send a notice to the claimant which communicates the decision and the amount due.
Briere v. C.E.I.C., [1989] 3 F.C. 88 (F.C.A.) A-637-86
Canada (A.G.) v. Laforest [1988], F.C.J. No. 546 (F.C.A.) A-607-87
[ previous | table of contents | next ]
2009-04-28