FRANÇAIS

JUDGMENT OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

Date:
 December 18, 1979

Docket:
 A-341-79

Umpire's Decision:
 CUB 5560;

"TRANSLATION"

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE PRATTE
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE LE DAIN
THE HONOURABLE DEPUTY HYDE

BETWEEN :

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA,

applicant,

-and-

FRANÇOISE SAMSON,

respondent.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Quebec City on
Tuesday, December 18, 1979) ;
Rendered by

THE JUSTICE PRATTE:

We are all of the view that this application should be dismissed. Counsel for the applicant attacked the decision a quo by saying that it was based on an erroneous proposition, namely that someone providing his services to another person without receiving any remuneration is not working within the meaning of s 21 of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971.

If we interpreted the decision of the umpire in the same way as counsel for the applicant, we would have to quash this decision. We consider that someone may work for another person within the meaning of s 21 although they receive no remuneration if, in addition, there is between the person performing the work and the person benefiting from it a relationship that may be likened to or regarded in the same way as a contract of service.

However, we do not interpret the decision a quo as counsel for the applicant does. In our view, this decision is based not simply on the fact that respondent was not receiving, and did not expect to receive, any remuneration, but rather on the umpire's decision that, in light of all the circumstances of this case (one such circumstance being that respondent was not paid), it was impossible to say that respondent had provided her services pursuant to a contract of service, or to a contract similar to a contract of service. On the evidence, this opinion does not rest on any error of law.



"Louis Pratte"