Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19980923


Docket: A-189-98

CORAM:      MARCEAU J.A.

         LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

         ROBERTSON J.A.

BETWEEN:

     ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

     Applicant

     - and -

     MAUREEN J. MILLS

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

     (Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia,

     on Wednesday, September 23, 1998)

MARCEAU J.A.

[1]      We are all of the view that this application for review of a decision of an umpire, taken under the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act, is well founded.

[2]      We have no choice, in view of the long-standing unanimous jurisprudence, but to repeat that leaving voluntarily one"s employment in order to be in a better position to seek a more favourable one cannot be seen as leaving for a "good cause" within the meaning of section 28 of the Act. The umpire was definitely not entitled in law to interfere with the finding of the Board of Referees and his decision cannot be allowed to stand.

[3]      The decision will therefore be set aside and the matter will be sent back to be reconsidered on the basis that the appeal from the decision of the Board of Referees cannot succeed.

     "Louis Marceau"

     J.A.


Date: 19980923


Docket: A-189-98

CORAM:      MARCEAU J.A.

         LÉTOURNEAU J.A.

         ROBERTSON J.A.

BETWEEN:

     ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

     Applicant

     - and -

     MAUREEN J. MILLS

     Respondent

Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on Wednesday, September 23, 1998.

Judgment rendered from the Bench on Wednesday, September 23, 1998.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:      MARCEAU J.A.

    

     IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

    


Date: 19980923


Docket: A-189-98

BETWEEN:

     ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

     Applicant

     - and -

     MAUREEN J. MILLS

     Respondent

    

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

     OF THE COURT

    


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.