Bruni v. Canada (Attorney General), 2006 FCA 125

Date: 20060330

Docket: A-358-05

Citation: 2006 FCA 125

CORAM:        DESJARDINS J.A.

                        DÉCARY J.A.

                        NADON J.A.

BETWEEN:

MAURO BRUNI

Applicant

and

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

Heard at Montréal, Quebec, on March 27, 2006.

Judgment delivered at Montréal, Quebec, on March 30, 2006.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                                                              DÉCARY J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                                                                                          DESJARDINS J.A.

                                                                                                                                    NADON J.A.

Date: 20060330

Docket: A-358-05

Citation: 2006 FCA 125

CORAM:        DESJARDINS J.A.

                        DÉCARY J.A.

                        NADON J.A.

BETWEEN:

MAURO BRUNI

Applicant

and

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

DÉCARY J.A.

[1]                The applicant is seeking judicial review of an Umpire's decision dated July 18, 2005 whereby the Umpire refused to reconsider an earlier decision made on February 18, 2005. In that earlier decision, the Umpire had confirmed the determination first made by the Employment Insurance Commission and reiterated by the Board of Referees that the applicant had lost his employment due to his misconduct.

[2]                The Umpire was of the view that there were no new facts within the meaning of the decision of this Court in Canada(Attorney General) v. Chan (1994), 178 N.R. 372 that could justify a reconsideration. The Umpire made no reviewable error in reaching that conclusion. The applicant himself, in his written submissions to the Umpire, recognized that he could not find any new facts. The applicant is essentially looking for a different result based on the same facts. (see also Clow v. Canada (Attorney General) (2004), 329 N.R. 246 (F.C.A.) and Pinkerton v. Canada(Attorney General), 2004 FCA 190.)

[3]                The application for judicial review should be dismissed with costs.

"Robert Décary"

"I concur

            Alice Desjardins J.A."

"I agree

            M. Nadon J.A."

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                                               A-358-05

(APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE TAX COURT OF CANADA DATED JULY 18, 2005, CUB NO. 62977A.

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                               MAURO BRUNI v.

                                                                                                ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                         Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                                                           March 27, 2006

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:                                      DÉCARY J.A.

CONCURRED IN BY:                                                          DESJARDINS J.A.

                                                                                                NADON J.A.

DATED:                                                                                  March 30, 2006

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: