Kolas v. Canada (Attorney General)

Kolas v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2001-03-16
Neutral citation
2001 FCA 65
File numbers
A-779-98
Decision Content
Date: 20010316
Docket: A-779-98
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 65
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
BETWEEN:
LENORE JULIA KOLAS
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Heard at Toronto, Ontario, Thursday, March 15, 2001
Judgment delivered at Toronto, Ontario,
on Friday, March 16, 2001
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: MALONE J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
Date: 20010316
Docket: A-779-98
Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 65
CORAM: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
MALONE J.A.
BETWEEN:
LENORE JULIA KOLAS
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
MALONE J.A.
Despite the able submissions of Stephen Kolas, the Applicant's spouse, I am unable to conclude that the Umpire erred in dismissing the Applicant's appeal from a decision of the Board of Referees ("Board").
The central issue before me is whether there was a denial of natural justice at the Board hearing which the Umpire failed to remedy. The Applicant says she relied on advice from Unemployment Insurance Commission ("Commission") officials to the effect that she did not need representation at the Board hearing. Further she alleges that no one from the Commission appeared at the hearing and the Board did not allow her the opportunity to cross-examine her former employer or to object to the introduction of hearsay evidence; evidence that weighed heavily in the Board's decision against her.
The Applicant did not place before the Umpire any affidavit deposing as to the irregularities just referred to. Complaints of procedural unfairness give rise to one of the rare circumstances where fresh evidence can be placed before an Umpire without leave. However, without such evidence there is simply no basis for the Umpire or this Court to properly deal with such an issue. To do so would involve speculation on my part as to the procedural fairness of the Board hearing which is improper.
The application should be dismissed. In the circumstances I would make no order as to costs.
"B. Malone"
J.A.
"I agree". "Marshall Rothstein"
J.A.
"I agree". "Karen R. Sharlow"
J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: A-779-98
STYLE OF CAUSE: LENORE JULIA KOLAS
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
CANADA
Respondent
DATE OF HEARING: THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 2001
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY: MALONE J.A.
CONCURRED IN BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
SHARLOW J.A.
Delivered at Toronto, Ontario on Friday, March 16, 2001
APPEARANCES BY: Mr. Steven Kolas
For the Applicant on her own behalf
Mr. Derek Edwards
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ms. Lenore Julia Kolas
31 Brookland Avenue
Aurora, Ontario
L5G 2H6
For the Applicant on her own behalf
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
Date: 20010316
Docket: A-779-98
BETWEEN:
LENORE JULIA KOLAS
Applicant
- and -
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT