Out of Canada

Archived Content

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.

*This asterisk denotes recent case law.

Questions to Answer

  1. Was the claimant out of Canada?
  2. What period was claimant out of Canada?
  3. Does the claimant fall within one of the exceptions of section 55 of the Regulations  ?
  4. Should a disentitlement apply?


Legal test

A claimant outside of Canada is not entitled to benefits (paragraph 37(b)) except as provided under Regulations section 55.

Onus of proof

Claimant must prove that the requirements for receiving benefits are met, and there are no disentitling or disqualifying conditions subsection 49(1).

Key Case Law

 *WALSH A-304-07/CUB 68174: The Federal Court of Appeal confirmed the Umpire decision that the 2 exceptions found in Regulation 55 (1)(b) and 55(1)(d) could be combined to allow for benefits to be payable for 14 consecutive days outside of Canada.

In *CUB 72341 and *CUB 71384, the Umpire determined the claimant’s could not combine 2 exceptions found in Regulation 55(1) as they differed from the Walsh A-304-07/CUB 68174 decision.

CUB 23424:  Clear language used in legislation.

PETERSON A-370-95:  Medical treatment in spa in California. Onus on claimant to prove requirements of the Regulations.

PRIVACY COMMISSIONER v. A.G CANADA 2001 SCC 89. File No. 27846, DEBORAH SMITH v. A.G. CANADA 2001 SCC 88. File No. 27844 The Customs Data Match program with CCRA does not violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the Privacy Act.

Quick Reference