• Home
  • Reconsideration of Claim and Liability for Overpayment

    II. Principles of Law

    (e) Waiver of Overpayment

    In accordance with subsection 56(2) of the Employment Insurance Regulations, the Commission has the power to waive an overpayment of benefits. Only the Commission has the authority to write-off an overpayment. The discretion may not be exercised by a Board of Referees, an Umpire or the Federal Court of Appeal. Although these bodies have the authority to recommend that the Commission waive an overpayment, the Commission is not bound by the recommendation.

    Cornish-Hardy v. Canada, [1979] 2 F.C. 437 (F.C.A.) A-647-78; affirmed [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1218 (S.C.C.) File no. 15944
    Kenney v. Canada (E.I.C.), June 23, 1998, F.C.J. No. 918 (F.C.A.) A-845-97
    Canada (A.G.) v. Filiatrault [1998], F.C.J. No. 1342 (F.C.A.) A-874-97
    Campbell v. Canada (A.G.) , [2002] F.C.J. No. 1130, July 24, 2002 (F.C.A.) T-576-01

    However, the Commission must act judiciously in exercising this discretion.

    Canada (A.G.) v. Lai [1998], F.C.J. No. 1016 (F.C.A.) A-525-97
    Campbell v. Canada (A.G.) , [2002] F.C.J. No. 1130, July 24, 2002 (F.C.A.) T-576-01

    In exercising its discretion, the Commission cannot disregard the findings of fact made by the Board of Referees. The Board is a quasi-judicial body which is required by the Act to hear and receive evidence from the parties and to make findings of fact. The Commission does not hold any hearings on the merits of a claim for waiver of overpayment. The Board of Referees findings of fact therefore are owed deference.

    Canada (A.G.) v. Purcell, [1996] 1 F.C. 644 at 662 (F.C.A.) A-694-94
    Guay v. Canada (Employment Insurance Commission), [1997] F.C.J. No. 1223 (F.C.A.) A-1036-96
    Campbell v. Canada (A.G.) , [2002] F.C.J. No. 1130, July 24, 2002 (F.C.A.) T-576-01

    The absence of a false or misleading statement is a condition precedent to the exercise of the Commission’s discretionary power under subsection 56(2) of the Regulations. In other words, the presence of a false or misleading declaration bars the Commission from exercising its discretionary power under Regulation 56.

    Allard v. Canada (A.G.) , [2001] F.C.J. No. 1148, File No. T-27-99(F.C.T.D.)
    Dubé v. Canada (A.G.) , [2002] F.C.J. No. 871, File No. T-1375-00, June 7, 2002 (F.C.A.)

    [  previous  |  table of contents  |  next  ]

    2009-04-29