Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, please contact us to request an alternate format.
CUB 59252 - The claimant was appealing a ruling from the Board that stated that the Commission could not pay him sickness benefits as of May 6, 2002 because there was no medical evidence that supported his incapacity. The Commission agent stated that the claimant had not provided " a current medical from his doctor attesting to his condition" and that in order for the claimant to receive the benefits medical certification was required. At the Board hearing the claimant submitted a letter from his doctor that stated that, for the last six weeks, the claimant had " continued to suffer from osteoarthritis (left knee), shortness of the right lower limb with instability in walking and standing, a cystic left kidney disease and systemic hypertension The claimant complained that he was not given a fair hearing by the Board, he claims that they only asked him three questions in a hearing that only lasted ten minutes. The Umpire felt that claimant was not given a fair hearing and was denied natural justice. The appeal was allowed.
Appellant: Samir Girgis
CUB 57011 - The claimant is appealing the decision of overpayment due to receiving sick payments while receiving maternity benefits and a failure to report these earnings. She argued that these sick leave benefits should not affect her maternity benefits because these sick leave benefits were acquired through her diligent work as a teacher over the years. The sick leave benefits are to assist teachers to care for a child directly following the birth of a child. The Umpire decided after reviewing the case and using the regulations that the sick pay was payable during the waiting period, pursuant to paragraph 39(3)(b), and was not taken into account when calculating her earnings for the purpose of allocation. The Umpire goes on to state:
" It is clear, from a reading of the legislative provisions, that Parliament intended to exclude from earnings to be allocated all payments of sick leave benefits payable by the employer immediately after the birth of a child and for the purpose of assisting the claimant in caring for the child."The appeal was allowed.
Appellant: Bozena E. Lebiadowski