The legislation sets out the general criteria of eligibility which a claimant must meet in order to establish entitlement to benefits. One of the criteria is that an insured person must have suffered an interruption of earnings from employment. An interruption of earnings is defined in the legislation as an interruption that occurs in the earnings of an insured person at any time and in any circumstances determined by the Regulations.
Section 2 Employment Insurance Act Employment Insurance Act
Dick v. Canada [1980] S.C.R. 243 (S.C.C.) File no. 15540 Judgement Of The Supreme Court Of Canada
Canada (A.G.) v. Kelly (1990), 111 N.R. 293 (F.C.A) A-106-89 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
An interruption of earnings occurs when a person is laid off or separated from his or her employment and, has a period of seven or more consecutive days during which no work is performed for that employer and no earnings arise from that employment.
Subsection 14(1) Employment Insurance Regulations Employment Insurance Regulations
There are three situations which can give rise to an interruption of earnings:
Subsections 14(1) and (2) Employment Insurance Regulations
Employment Insurance RegulationsSubsection 23(1) Employment Insurance Act Employment Insurance Act
Canada (A.G.) v. Hartmann (1989), 102 N.R. 386 (F.C.A.) A-516-88 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
Canada (A.G.) v. Duffenais, A-551-92, April 23, 1993 (F.C.A.) Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
In order to establish an interruption of earnings, a claimant must be unemployed for seven (7) or more consecutive days.
Subsection 14(1) Employment Insurance Regulations Employment Insurance Regulations
Where a claimant ceases working for an employer, but within seven (7) days returns to that employer at reduced or part-time hours, there is no interruption of earnings.
A person who continues to perform duties under a contract of service but for very little in the way of monetary remuneration, has not suffered an interruption of earnings. The fact that a claimant is not paid may be evidence of a lay-off or separation from employment, but it is not conclusive and it is an error in law to treat it as conclusive.
Canada (A.G.) v. Enns (1990), 126 N.R. 393 (F.C.A.) A-559-89 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
Canada (A.G.) v. Larocque, A-592-99, February 22, 2001 (F.C.A.) Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
Normally, an interruption of earnings occurs at the time of the lay-off or separation from employment. However, where an employee is entitled, under his or her contract of service, to a period of leave, he or she shall not be regarded as having had an interruption of earnings in respect of that period. When an employee is laid off or separated from his or her employment at a time when he is entitled to a period off work, the interruption of earnings will take place at the expiry of that period of time off work rather than after seven consecutive days of no work and no earnings.
Subsection 14(3) Employment Insurance Regulations
Employment Insurance RegulationsSubsection 11(4) Employment Insurance Act Employment Insurance Act
Canada (A.G.) v. Kelly (1990), 111 N.R. 293 (F.C.A.) A-106-89 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
Canadian Marine Officers Union v. Board of Referees (1988), 99 N.R. 134 (F.C.A.) A-220-87 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
The purpose of the legislation is to prevent a worker from receiving employment insurance benefits for a period for which he or she is already compensated according to their special work schedule. The issue is whether the period for which a claim is contested is part of the "leave" to which the claimant is entitled as part of the working arrangements with the employer.
These legislative provisions do not violate the equality provisions of section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms.