A-452-81
Attorney General of Canada (Applicant)
v.
Florentin Laplume (Respondent)
Court of Appeal, Pratte and Le Dain JJ. and Hyde
D.J.—Montreal, November 6, 1981.
Judicial review — Unemployment insurance — Application
to set aside Umpire's decision that an amount paid to respond
ent as compensation for an attack on his reputation did not
constitute earnings pursuant to the Unemployment Insurance
Act, 1971 — Whether that finding may reasonably be drawn
from the record as it stands — Application allowed — Federal
Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, s. 28.
APPLICATION for judicial review.
COUNSEL:
James M. Mabbutt for applicant.
Marie-Josée Dandenault for respondent.
SOLICITORS:
Deputy Attorney General of Canada for
applicant.
Boivin, Dandenault & Bachir, Baie -Comeau,
for respondent.
The following is the English version of the
reasons for judgment of the Court delivered orally
by
PRATTE J.: We are all of the opinion that this
application should be allowed.
The Umpire found that the amount of $2,000
received by the respondent had been paid to him to
compensate him for injury to his reputation, and
because of this, did not constitute earnings within
the meaning of the Unemployment Insurance Act,
1971, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 48. This conclusion
seems to the Court to be arbitrary and, in our
view, cannot reasonably be supported by the
record as it stands.
For these reasons, the application will be
allowed, the decision a quo quashed and the
matter referred back to the Chief Umpire to be
decided by him, or so that he may cause it to be
decided by an umpire other than Umpire Decary,
on the assumption that it cannot reasonably be
concluded from the record as it stands that the
amount of $2,000 received by respondent does not
constitute earnings within the meaning of the
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.