Benefit Period of Employment Insurance (8:V): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Benefit Period of Employment Insurance (8:V) (view source)
Revision as of 18:36, 4 August 2017
, 4 August 2017→D. Income That Is Not Treated As Earnings
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Recent cases suggest that in certain circumstances some earnings '''may not delay''' the start of an EI claim. In ''Attorney General of Canada v Doreen Myers'', 2006 FCA57 the court found that the claimant’s vacation pay did not delay the start of a claim because it was not a payment made by reason of a separation, thus allowing benefits to be received earlier, and possibly at a higher rate. | Recent cases suggest that in certain circumstances some earnings '''may not delay''' the start of an EI claim. In ''Attorney General of Canada v Doreen Myers'', 2006 FCA57 the court found that the claimant’s vacation pay did not delay the start of a claim because it was not a payment made by reason of a separation, thus allowing benefits to be received earlier, and possibly at a higher rate. | ||
See also the case of ''Attorney General of Canada v Bielich'', 2005 FCA 363. In this case the court allowed a $24,000 payment to be exempted from the claimant’s allocation of earnings because the purpose of the payment was to compensate the claimant for giving up his right to seek reinstatement, not to compensate for lost pay. | See also the case of ''Attorney General of Canada v Bielich'', 2005 FCA 363. In this case the court allowed a $24,000 payment to be exempted from the claimant’s allocation of earnings because the purpose of the payment was to compensate the claimant for giving up his right to seek reinstatement, not to compensate for lost pay. | ||