Date: 19980526
Docket: A-761-97
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
DESJARDINS J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
BETWEEN:
DENISE AUBÉ
Applicant
AND:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Hearing held at Québec, Quebec on Tuesday, May 26, 1998.
Judgment delivered from the bench on Tuesday, May 26, 1998.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
Date: 19980526
Docket: A-761-97
CORAM: MARCEAU J.A.
DESJARDINS J.A.
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
BETWEEN:
DENISE AUBÉ
Applicant
AND:
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Québec, Quebec,
| on Tuesday, May 26, 1998) |
LÉTOURNEAU J.A.
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of a Deputy Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in which he dismissed the appeal of the applicant, who argued that her employment from May 1 to September 15, 1995 was insurable employment within the meaning of the Unemployment Insurance Act (the Act).
[2] For all intents and purposes, the Deputy Judge"s reasons amount to the following boilerplate reasons which have unfortunately recently appeared in this area:
| Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, including the testimony, the admissions and the documentary evidence, I am satisfied that the appellant has not shown on a balance of evidence that the Minister acted wilfully or arbitrarily in making his determination. |
|
[3] Pursuant to subsection 70(2) of the Act, the judge is required to give reasons for his or her decision on appeal of a decision by the Minister of National Revenue (the Minister) to except the claimant"s employment from the category of insurable employment. At the stage of analysing the legality of the Minister"s decision, the duty to provide reasons requires the judge to determine whether or not the essential facts on which the Minister relied in exercising his discretion had been refuted, on the balance of probabilities, and whether the Minister failed to take into account relevant facts supported by the evidence.
[4] Unfortunately, the Deputy Judge simply listed the facts considered by the Minister in the instant case, without determining whether or not they had been validly refuted and without at the very least analyzing the evidence relating to the facts challenged by the claimant, with the result that it is impossible to know why he dismissed her appeal.
[5] Considering the duty imposed on the judge to give reasons and the cases decided by this Court holding that reasons similar to those given by the Deputy Judge are not adequate and sufficient to meet the requirements of the Act,1 the application for judicial review will be allowed, the decision will be set aside and the matter referred back to the Tax Court of Canada to be retried by a different judge.
Gilles Létourneau
J.A.
Certified true translation
M. Iveson
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NO.: A-761-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: Denise Aubé v. Attorney General of Canada
PLACE OF HEARING: Québec, Québec
DATE OF HEARING: May 26, 1998
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF MARCEAU J.A., DESJARDINS J.A., LÉTOURNEAU, J.A.
DATED: May 26, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Jérôme Carrier FOR THE APPLICANT
Sylvie Gadoury FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Rochon, Belzile, Carrier, Auger & Ass.
Québec, Quebec FOR THE APPLICANT
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
Ottawa, Ontario
__________________
1 Dion v. Minister of National Revenue, F.C.A., No. A-624-97, April 29, 1998; Bonneau and Martin v. Minister of National Revenue and Her Majesty the Queen, F.C.A., Nos. A-652-95 and A-653-95, February 12, 1997; Côté v. Minister of National Revenue and Transport en commun Côté Inc., F.C.A., No. A-824-97, May 13, 1998.
Email this Content