Charest v. Canada
T-1182-93
Pinard J.
4/2/99
12 pp.
Claim for declaratory order that plaintiff's debt to Employment and Immigration Commission time barred-In November 1988, Employment and Immigration Commission retroactively cancelling plaintiff's unemployment insurance benefit period (December 1984 to December 1985), effectively creating overpayment of $9,600-Close relative of plaintiff pleading guilty to criminal offence of defrauding Employment and Immigration of sum exceeding $1,000 in claim for benefits on plaintiff's behalf-Criminal charge against plaintiff in relation to same facts ending in stay of proceedings-In February 1994, Federal Court issuing certificate ordering plaintiff to pay sum of $9,611-Plaintiff technically alleging right to recovery of amounts overpaid to plaintiff by Commission time barred, owing to expiration of 36-month period enacted in Act, s. 35(4)-Action dismissed-Existence of plaintiff's false statements firmly established, and particular factual context gives rise to presumption statements made knowingly-To rebut presumption, plaintiff had to explain reason for making statements, but plaintiff totally refrained from doing so-Commission adequately justified opinion plaintiff knowingly made false statements in question, thereby committing offence under Act, s. 33(1), as provided in Act, s. 35(4) (also providing for extensions of time to 72 months in that case)-Stay of criminal proceedings against plaintiff does not render inadmissible in Federal Court evidence tending to demonstrate plaintiff knowingly made false statements, because judgments of criminal courts not res judicata in subsequent civil trials-Unemployment Insurance Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. U-1, ss. 33(1), 35(4).