Claimant Does Not Have to Repay Employment Insurance Advance Payment
📌 In brief
The Social Security Tribunal ruled that a claimant does not have to repay an Employment Insurance advance payment because they were eligible for the full benefit period as recalculated.
⚖️ Legal holding
A claimant does not have to repay an advance payment if they are eligible for the full benefit period as recalculated.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's eligibility for Employment Insurance Emergency Response Benefit was recalculated, leading to the reversal of the original decision requiring repayment of an advance payment.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Social Security Tribunal reversed a decision requiring a claimant to repay an Employment Insurance advance payment, finding the claimant eligible for the full benefit period as recalculated.
📚 Full judgment Official document
[TRANSLATION] Citation: Canada Employment Insurance Commission v LB , 2026 SST 7 Social Security Tribunal of Canada Appeal Division Decision Appellant: [redacted] Representative: [NAME] Respondent: [redacted] Decision under appeal: General Division decision dated April 7, 2025 (GE‑25‑232) Tribunal member: [NAME] of hearing: Settlement conference Decision date: January 9, 2026 File number: AD-25-336 On this page Decision Overview Issue Analysis Conclusion Decision [ 1 ] The appeal is allowed. The Claimant doesn’t have to pay back the $2,000 advance payment she received. Overview [ 2 ] On April 22, 2020, the Claimant applied for Employment Insurance ( EI ) benefits, after she stopped working on February 13, 2020. Based on the employer’s Record of Employment ( ROE ), she stopped working on March 27 because of a shortage of work. [ 3 ] The Commission established a benefit period for the Employment Insurance Emergency Response Benefit ( [NAME] ) effective April 5, 2020. It also paid her a $2,000 advance payment on April 27, 2020. [ 4 ] On March 12, 2022, the Commission asked the Claimant to pay back the $2,000 advance payment. According to the Commission, the Claimant was eligible for 11 weeks of the [NAME] , but she received a total of 15 weeks of the [NAME] . The Claimant disagreed and appealed to the Tribunal’s General Division. [ 5 ] The General Division decided that the Claimant would have been eligible for benefits for the three weeks after June 20, 2020, because she had earned less than $1,000 during that period. It found that the Claimant had to pay back $500 of the [NAME] advance payment she received. [ 6 ] I am allowing the Commission’s appeal. Issue [ 7 ] Does the Claimant have to pay back the $2,000 [NAME] advance payment that the Commission paid her? Analysis [ 8 ] The Claimant asked me to hold a settlement conference. The Commission agreed to take part in the conference. So, I called the parties to attend. [ 9 ] The Commission said that it agreed to use its discretion and to check the Claimant’s eligibility for the [NAME] for the weeks of June 21, 2020; June 28, 2020; July 5, 2020; and July 12, 2020. [ 10 ] The employer confirmed the information that the Claimant gave. Footnote 1 So, the Commission accepted the Claimant’s eligibility for the [NAME] for the four weeks in question. Footnote 2 She is eligible for $2,000 of the [NAME] . This amount of the [NAME] should be applied to her overpayment. This means that she doesn’t have to pay back the $2,000 advance payment. [ 11 ] In the circumstances, the Commission’s appeal should be allowed. Conclusion [ 12 ] The appeal is allowed. The Claimant doesn’t have to pay back the $2,000 [NAME] advance payment she received. Footnotes Footnote 1 See AD27-1 to AD27-4. Return to footnote 1 referrer Footnote 2 The Claimant’s total employment income is $1,000 or less over a four-week period. See section 153.9(4) of the Employment Insurance Act . Return to footnote 2 referrer
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The claimant's eligibility for the full benefit period as recalculated by the Commission.
- The employer confirmed the information provided by the claimant regarding her employment status.
- The claimant earned less than $1,000 during the disputed weeks, making her eligible for benefits.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The initial determination that the claimant had to repay part of the advance payment due to overpayment.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The claimant does not have to repay the Employment Insurance advance payment.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the claimant needed to repay an advance payment for Employment Insurance benefits.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the claimant does not have to repay the advance payment because they were eligible for the full benefit period as recalculated.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 153.9(4) of the Employment Insurance Act was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the recalculated eligibility for the Employment Insurance Emergency Response Benefit.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the claimant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may not have to repay an advance payment if their eligibility for Employment Insurance benefits is recalculated.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence and documents related to the claimant's employment income and eligibility for the Employment Insurance Emergency Response Benefit mattered.