Appeal to Board of Referees
II. Principles of Law
(g) Decision of Board of Referees
(i) Decision Must Be In Writing
The legislation provides that the decision of the Board of Referees must be in writing. The Chairperson must file the written decision at the office of the Commission from which notice of the Commission's decision was received. The appellant and any other party interested in the appeal are to be notified in writing of the Board's decision.
Subsection 114(3) Employment Insurance Act
Employment Insurance ActSubsections 83(3) and (4) Employment Insurance Regulations Employment Insurance Regulations
Where a member of the Board dissents from the decision of the Board, the reason for the dissent is to be recorded in the report of the proceedings of the Board.
Subsection 83(2) Employment Insurance Regulations Employment Insurance Regulations
(ii) Decision Must Contain Findings of Fact
The legislation also provides that the decision of the Board of Referees must include a statement of the findings of the Board on questions of fact material to the decision. A Board's failure to state the findings of fact on which its decision is based constitutes an error of law.
Subsection 114(3) Employment Insurance Act Employment Insurance Act
Bouchard v. Canada (Unemployment Insurance Commission Board of Referees) [1977], F.C.J. No. 1101 (F.C.A.) A-521-77 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
Matheodakis v. C.E.I.C., [1981] 2 F.C. 813 (F.C.A.) A-1-81 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
Canada (A.G.) v. Sharma, October 15, 1985, F.C.J. No. 920 (F.C.A.) A-1466-84 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
This legislative requirement is met provided the Board states its findings on the central question of fact material to its decision. However, the Board is not required to also state its findings on all of the constituent sub-questions which are before it. Hearings before the Board and its decisions are intended to be an informal process for resolving the problems of ordinary people. The Board's reasons should not be read microscopically.
Roberts v. Canada (Employment and Immigration Commission), May 9, 1985, F.C.J. No. 413 (F.C.A.) A-595-84 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
Cox v. Canada (A.G.), March 31, 1998, F.C.J. No. 403 (F.C.A.) A-168-97 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
Furthermore, the legislation only requires that the decision of the Board contain a statement of its findings on questions of fact which are material to its decision. The Act does not require that the decision contain an analysis and discussion of the evidence relating to these questions. It cannot be deduced merely from the silence of the Board on a particular matter, that it neglected to take that evidence into consideration.
Nevertheless, it is imperative for Boards of Referees to address the issues actually presented to them carefully and to explain their findings in coherent and consistent reasoning. Anything less is unacceptable.
When there is an issue of credibility, the Board of Referees, in order to comply with the legislation, must state at least briefly, that it rejects certain evidence on this basis and why. When it fails to do so it errs in law.
Parks v. Canada (A.G.), June 1, 1998, F.C.J. No. 770 (F.C.A.) A-321-97 Judgment of the federal court of appeal
Oberde Bellefleur OP Clinique Dentaire O. Bellefleur v. Canada (A.G.), 2008 FCA 13 A-139-07 Judgment Of The Federal Court Of Appeal
[ previous Previous page | table of contents | next Next page ]