END NOTES

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

1. Some data: claims to the board: in 1995-96: 3,155,104; in 1996-97: 2,673,436; in 1997-98: 2,767,067. Revised claims (new facts etc.) in 1995-96: 1,859,015; in 1996-97: 1,603,815; in 1997-98: 1,647,200. Appeals to the board: in 1995-96: 36,443; in 1996-97: 33,594; in 1997-98: 34,883. Appeals to the Umpire: in 1995-96: 4,233; in 1996-97: 3,675; in 1997-98: 3,387. Number of chairpersons: 255; members 713: total 968.
2. Case law is the body of principles and rules developed over the years by superior courts.
3. Common law is the general law of Anglo-Saxon countries by which the principles and rules defined by the courts is given precedence (judge-made law). Similarly, a codified legal system is characterized by the presence of "codes." Quebec has a codified legal system, even though precedents play an important role, particularly in public law.
4. For a study of the development of the system see P. Issalys, Unemployment Insurance Benefits: A Study, Law Reform Commission, 1977, at 158.
5. Y. Ouellette, Les tribunaux administratifs au Canada, Ed. Themis, 1997, at 1-19; Macaulay and Sprague, Practice and Procedure before Administrative Tribunals, Carswell, 1988, vol. 1, c. 2.4.
6. R.S.Q. c. C-12, s. 58; R.S.Q. c. B-1, s. 1.
7. P. Garant, Droit administratif, vol. 2, at 84; D. Mullan, Administrative Law, Carswell, 3rd ed. 1996, nos. 50-69; Jones and DeVillars, Principles of Administrative Law, Carswell, 2nd ed. 1994, at 179-193.
8. Ontario Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22.
9. Reference re Residential Tenancies Act, 1979, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 714, 743.
10. C.P. Ltd. v. Matsqui Indian Band, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 3, 56. Judgement of the Supreme court
11. S.Q. 1996 c. 54, s. 9.; see Macaulay and Sprague, vol. 4, c. 38-161.
12. Une Justice Administrative pour le Citoyen, at 23.
13. A-3-96 (Gagnon): "since the role of the board is the same as that of a judge . . . " Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 12280 (Alarie: "the jurisdiction of the tribunal") Umpire Decision; CUB 12452
(Hjorleifson: "administrative tribunal") Umpire Decision; CUB 20783 (Crawford: "proceeding is appellate in nature and must never be . . . an inquisitorial process") Umpire Decision;
CUB 39716 (Batterham: "quasi-judicial tribunal"). Umpire Decision
14. CUB 12280 (Alarie). Umpire Decision
15. Tétreault-Gadoury v. Canada, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 22, 31 et seq. "consider the constitutional validity of this Act". Judgement of the Supreme court
16. Ste-Angèle de Monnoir v. Bérubé, [1986] R.D.J. 590 (C.A.Q.).
17. Cooper v. Canada, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 854, 896. Judgement of the Supreme court
18. Issalys, at 163.
19. A-951-90 (Frenette) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-961-87 (Sepinwal) Xuan, [1994] 2 F.C. 348, (FCA) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-312-96 (Demers) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-106-96 (Tremblay) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-704-95 (Savarie) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-378-96 (Lalonde). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
20. A-217-93 (Kinkead) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-212-89 (McCabe) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-493-87 (Kidd) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-869-87 (Thomson) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-1118-88 (Laporte) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-319-87 (Brooks). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
21. A-1050-90 (Dawley: determining whether a loan was involved) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-721-95 (Pleau: "this is a question of legal classification") Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-258-90 (Prescod: the existence of a loan). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
22. A-156-95 (Poitras) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-160-95 (Forget) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-184-95 (Borghi). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
23. CUB 7887 (Korobchuk) Umpire Decision; CUB 23906 (Bouchie: "interpretor of law"). Umpire Decision
24. A-309-81 (Pérusse, 14/12/81) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-369-88 (Bartone) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-130-96 (Meunier) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 22672 (Khan) Umpire Decision; CUB 11942 (Hicks) Umpire Decision; CUB 10736 (Gravesande). Umpire Decision
25. CUB 22097 (Martel: "meaning given to a provision or expression") Umpire Decision; CUB 17910 (Prescod: legal characterization of a transaction such as a loan) Umpire Decision; CUB 23906 (Bouchie: "its own . . . interpretation of law") Umpire Decision; A-434-82 (Delma: the Board, having based its conclusion on an irrelevant consideration, erred in law). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
26. A-57-96 (Faucher: "a claimant's availability is a question of fact, which should normally be disposed of on the basis of an assessment of the evidence"). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
27. CUB 21911 (Lavigne-Lincourt), "The board of referees, that is to say an administrative tribunal, derives all its powers solely from the Act". Umpire Decision
28. Y. Ouellette, at 52; Macaulay and Sprague, Practice and Procedure, vol. 2, c. 12-10: "The superior court have the inherent jurisdiction to issue subpoenas in aid to inferior tribunals" (at 12-82.4); Mullan, no 409.
29. CUB 7338 (Ouellet) Umpire Decision; CUB 5912 (McGinn) Umpire Decision; CUB 8325 (Marcoux). Umpire Decision
30. CUB 40182b (Forgie) Umpire Decision; CUB 18611 (McDonald: non-professional tribunal). Umpire Decision
31. Garant, vol. 2, at 519-542; Mullan, nos. 812-831; Jones and DeVillars, at 445-472.
32. A-453-95 (Morin) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-1598-92 (Easson). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
33. CUB 7887 (Korobchuk) Umpire Decision; CUB 7789 (Brown) Umpire Decision; CUB 23906 (Bouchie). Umpire Decision
34. Garant, vol. 2, at 535; A-737-82 (Von Findenigg) [1984] 1 F.C. 65 (F.C.A.) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; T-1689-85 (Bacon). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
35. Boulais v. Hamel [1968] B.R. 561, 567 (C.A.Q.); Doyle v. Sparling [1987] R.J.Q. 307 (C.A.Q.); CUB 7461 (Bourgeois: there is no question of ultra petita if the board does not uphold the arguments put forward by the Commission. Umpire Decision
36. A-1964 (Dyson) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-371-93 Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 45742 (Grisé) Umpire Decision; CUB 46929 (Walker). Umpire Decision
37. CUB 25402 (Phillips) Umpire Decision; CUB14322 (Pouliot) Umpire Decision; CUB 23737 (Dyson). Umpire Decision
38. CUB 25402 (Phillips) Umpire Decision; CUB 13328 (Hamilton) Umpire Decision; CUB 14322 (Pouliot). Umpire Decision
39. A-999-96 (D'Astoli) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-247-96 (Thibault). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
40. A-371-93 (Read: "any decision the Commission made or should have made"). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
41. A-487-93 (Kaur) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 43582 (Zarychta). Umpire Decision
42. A-168-80 (Desjardins) [1981] 1 F.C. 220. Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
43. A-1284-92 (Simard) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-694-94 (Purcell) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-694-93 (Friesen) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-0008-95 (Thompson) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-308-94 (Phung) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 47847 (S. Roy). Umpire Decision
44. A-874-97 (Filiatrault) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-815-96 (Romero) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-676-96 (Gagnon). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
45. A-42-90 (Chartier) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-80-90 (Plourde) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; T-390-95 (Carrier) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-432-96 (Cardamone). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
46. A-346-93 (Knowler) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-308-94 (Phung: "unless it is vitiated by a fundamental error") Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-378-98 (Pyne) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 46625 (St-Amant) Umpire Decision; CUB 44167 (Labelle) Umpire Decision; CUB 45285 (Bilotta: "Discretion purportedly exercised rote... is an arbitrary decision."). Umpire Decision
47. A-1124-92 (Archambault) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-1449-92 (Kolish). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
48. A-708-95 (Dunham) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-701-96 (Stark: "in exceptional circumstances"). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
49. A-453-95 and Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal A-681-96 (Morin) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-769-96 (Longsworth) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-9-98 (Idemudia) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-330-93 (Smith). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal The arbitrary action most often committed by the Commission is not taking into account mitigating factors in exercising its discretion: A-681-96 (Morin). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
50. A-372-96 (D. Georges) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 45422 (Michaud: here "the Board of Referees ruled on the soundness of the decision, which was a flagrant excess of jurisdiction" (ultra vires act) Umpire Decision; CUB 44163 (Djoudi). Umpire Decision
51. CUB 7052 (Van Toorn). Umpire Decision
52. CUB 12752 (Henderson). Umpire Decision
53. Granger v. C.E.I.C., [1989] 1 S.C.R. 141 and [1986] 3 F.C. 70 (FCA) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 17884 (Sagutch) Umpire Decision; CUB 46747 (Pilon-Vaive) Umpire Decision; CUB 45834 (L'Archevêque) Umpire Decision; CUB 42458 (Wald) Umpire Decision; CUB 46195 (Piché) Umpire Decision; CUB 40964A (Bélanger: even if the claimant was misinformed by officers of the Commission, the board and the Umpire must comply with the Act . . . even with regret) Umpire Decision; CUB 45431 (Falinski: the Commission itself does not have the power to amend the Act for reasons of fairness) Umpire Decision; CUB 10338 (Boldt: "only Parliament can amend the Act") Umpire Decision; CUB 23794 (Sharratt) Umpire Decision; CUB 23424 (Bosdet: without the benefit of interpretation, the board cannot change the Act). Umpire Decision
54. CUB 42386 (Baillargeon) Umpire Decision; CUB 42772 (Desroches). Umpire Decision
55. CUB 28736 (Robinson). Umpire Decision
56. CUB 24461 (Yates: "decision of the Board of Referees goes against the jurisprudence"). Umpire Decision
57. A-100-89 (Fries) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 23828 (Cecconi) Umpire Decision; CUB 25241 (Magder) Umpire Decision; CUB 10602 (Ramirez). Umpire Decision
58. CUB 29339 (Hann). Umpire Decision
59. Garant, vol. 2, at 142; Mullan, no. 411
60. CUB 17884 (Sagutch: claim for reimbursement of overpayment) Umpire Decision; CUB 15036 (Tomlinson: Statistics Canada methodology) Umpire Decision; CUB 20125 (Tuppatsch). Umpire Decision
61. CUB 8892 (Hartley: racial discrimination) Umpire Decision; CUB 23493 (Brady: religious convictions) Umpire Decision; CUB 11412 (Bendall: religious freedom) Umpire Decision; CUB 15186 (Boogaars: refusal to work on Saturday, s. 15 of Charter) Umpire Decision; CUB 15847b (Gauthier: national placement program not contrary to s. 15 of Charter); CUB 22405 (Cody: Commission's decision not to refer certain students to training courses complies with s. 15 of Charter) Umpire Decision; CUB 17462 (Timmons: idem.). Umpire Decision
62. Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929 Judgement of the Supreme court; Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Com.) [2000] S.C.C. 44. We then question the claim that "the Charter could not be invoked before the Board" expressed in; Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Com.)CUB 40182b (Forgie) Umpire Decision; CUB 45097 (Larochelle). Umpire Decision
63. Tétreault-Gadoury, at 34 et seq Judgement of the Supreme court; A-216-96 (Nishri). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
64. Cooper, at 887 et seq; CUB 45097 (Larochelle). Umpire Decision
65. CUB 43062 (Francoeur). Umpire Decision
66. A-207-97 (Constantineau) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-479-94 (Faltermeier) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-589-86 (Robinson) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-226-88 (Meredith) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 40182b (Forgie) Umpire Decision; CUB 42407a (Fromm). Umpire Decision
67. R. v. Swain, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 933, 992 et seq. Judgement of the Supreme court
68. Andrews v. Law Society of B.C., [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143, 165. Judgement of the Supreme court
69. Ibid. at 168.
70. Tétreault-Gadoury, at 41. Judgement of the Supreme court
71. Andrews, at 175. Judgement of the Supreme court
72. Tétreault-Gadoury, at 43. Judgement of the Supreme court
73. A-589-86 (Robinson: the difference between a group plan and a non-group plan complies with s. 15) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 22373 (Lemieux) Umpire Decision; CUB 19483 (Irving) Umpire Decision; CUB 20090 (Finkle) Umpire Decision; CUB 23942a (Allsopp). Umpire Decision
74. Ruffo v. Conseil de la Magistrature, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 267, 293 (professional rights of judges) Judgement of the Supreme court; Pearlman v. Manitoba Law Society, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 869, 881 (professional rights of lawyers) Judgement of the Supreme court; Wilson v. B.C. Medical Services Com. (1989), 53 D.L.R. 4th 171 (B.C.C.A.) (rights of doctors). Statements in previous cases must be read with caution: CUB 15036 (Tomlinson) Umpire Decision; CUB 17884 (Sagutch). Umpire Decision
75. CUB 3805 (Lajoie) Umpire Decision; CUB 24370 (Louis). Umpire Decision
76. Singh v. M.E.I. [1985] 1 S.C.R. 178, 213. Judgement of the Supreme court
77. CUB 45431 (Falinski). Umpire Decision
78. CUB 46071 (Lefebvre) Umpire Decision; CUB 12444 (Peterman) and Umpire Decision; A-532-86. Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
79. Garant, at 258, 267; Y. Ouellette, at 150; Jones and DeVillars, at 241-245; Macaulay and Sprague, vol. 2, c. 12.
80. The Federal Court of Appeal used the expression "public meeting at which members of the public are merely given an opportunity to blow off steam (l'occasion de dire sa façon de penser)", re CRTC et London Cable, [1976] 2 F.C. 621, 625 (C.A.); in another decision, the Superior Court spoke of a parody of a hearing rushed through in a few minutes: JE 91-807 (C.S.Q.).
81. CUB 11004 (Schiml): "The claimant indicated that at the hearing before the board of referees he was not authorized to be there when his former employer explained the reason for his dismissal. The employer, for his part, did not appear when his evidence was presented. These proceedings were highly irregular and, in the circumstances, this was a refusal to provide an impartial hearing." Umpire Decision; CUB 25210 (Ludlow: refusal to hear witnesses). Umpire Decision
82. CUB 10147 (Carrier) Umpire Decision; A-357-81 (Ouellette) Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; A-219-93 (M. Baillargeon: "full and complete hearing") Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal; CUB 19057 (Annesty) Umpire Decision; CUB 11018 (Haight) Umpire Decision; CUB 21047 (Frappier) Umpire Decision; CUB 36309 (Kucyniak). Umpire Decision
83. CUB 25490 (Buxton) Umpire Decision; CUB 25116 (Dumais). Umpire Decision
84. Garant, vol. 2, at 156, 157; Mullan, nos. 436-448; Macaulay and Sprague, vol. 3, c. 27A.
85. Chander v. Alberta Ass. of Architects, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 848, 862 Umpire Decision; A-463-90 (Severud). Umpire Decision
86. Garant, vol. 2, at 157.
87. Matsqui Indian Band.
88. McKeigan v. Hickman, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 796, 826. Judgement of the Supreme court
89. Valente v. R [1985] 2 S.C.R. 673, 685; Ruffo at 297. Judgement of the Supreme court
90. This old statement by Lord Heward in R. v. Sussex Justices, [1924] 1 K.B. 256, 259, has been repeated hundreds of times in our case law ; Blanchette v. C.I.S. [1973] S.C.R. 833, 843; R. v. S. (R.D.) , [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484, 530. Judgement of the Supreme court
91. Canada v. Tobiass, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 391, 419: "it is especially important that the judiciary should be seen to be independent". Judgement of the Supreme court
92. 2747-3174 Québec Inc. v. Régie des permis d'alcool [1996] 3 S.C.R. 919, 952: "The perception of impartiality remains essential to maintaining public confidence in the justice system". Judgement of the Supreme court
93. Valente, at 685 Judgement of the Supreme court; R. v. Lippé [1991] 2 S.C.R. 114, 144, 152 Judgement of the Supreme court; A-100-95 (Paul). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
94. The expression "reasonable observer" is also used; Canada v. Tobiass, at 420; "fully informed observer" Judgement of the Supreme court; Idziak v. Canada, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 631, 660. Judgement of the Supreme court
95. R. v. S. (R.D.), at 531 Judgement of the Supreme court; A-100-95 (Paul: reasonable person who is well informed of the situation). Judgement of the Federal Court of Appeal
96. Ruffo, at 299 Judgement of the Supreme court; R. v. Bain [1992] 1 S.C.R. 91. Judgement of the Supreme court
97. Matsqui Indian Band, at 44, 69. Judgement of the Supreme court
98. Ibid.
99. Régie des permis d'alcool, at 962. Judgement of the Supreme court

[ index Index page | table of contents Tribunal Proceedings - Table of Contents | Next Page ]