Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• CRA found Jamie Thomas Leibel ineligible for CERB and CRB benefits for specific periods, citing voluntary job departure and insufficient income reduction related to COVID-19

• Records of employment from Mr. Leibel's former employers indicated varying reasons for separation, including "Quit," "Shortage of work / End of contract or season," and "Dismissal"

• The Agent failed to inquire about the circumstances surrounding Mr. Leibel's employment terminations, denying him a fair opportunity to address those concerns

• Attorney General of Canada conceded that the CRA's decisions were both unreasonable and procedurally unfair

• Evidence on file showing dismissal and layoff was not meaningfully addressed by the Agent, undermining the rationality of the decisions

• Judicial review was granted in part, with the matter remitted to the CRA for redetermination by a different agent rather than the Court directing eligibility

Background and facts of the case

Jamie Thomas Leibel, a self-represented construction worker, applied for and received the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) for seven four-week periods spanning March 15, 2020 to September 26, 2020. He also applied for and received the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB) for 26 two-week periods from September 27, 2020 to August 28, 2021, and again from September 26, 2021 to October 23, 2021. Prior to the pandemic, Mr. Leibel worked as a full-time operator in the construction industry but lost his position once more experienced workers returned to work. During the pandemic, he started working for temporary agencies on short-term contracts, which prompted him to apply for the CERB and the CRB as his contracts were short, resulting in a reduction in work.

The CRA's verification process and initial denial

On July 24, 2024, the Canada Revenue Agency sent a verification letter to Mr. Leibel requesting specific documents to support his benefit claims. The CRA subsequently informed Mr. Leibel on February 13, 2025 that he was not eligible for the CERB and the CRB on the basis that the CRA did not receive a reply to the verification letter. Mr. Leibel then requested a second review on March 18, 2025, submitting the first refusal letter dated February 13, 2025, an undated handwritten explanation letter, and bank statements from the Royal Bank of Canada covering the period from August 27, 2019 to December 29, 2021.

The second review and the Agent's assessment

On April 4, 2025, a Canada Emergency Benefits Validation Agent conducted a telephone interview with Mr. Leibel. The Agent asked questions about the impact of COVID-19 on his work and requested additional documentation to verify his income during the CERB and CRB periods, as the documents Mr. Leibel had filed to date were not sufficient. The Agent asked for pay stubs, records of employment, or letters from Mr. Leibel's employers. Mr. Leibel responded by providing records of employment from his former employers on April 15, 16, and 17, 2025. Under the section titled "reason for issuing this ROE," the employers indicated "Quit," "Shortage of work / End of contract or season," or "Dismissal" with respect to his various jobs. Despite this mixed evidence, the Agent concluded on April 25, 2025 that Mr. Leibel was not eligible for the CERB for the period of June 7, 2020 to September 26, 2020 — because he earned more than $1,000 of employment or self-employment income during the applicable payment period, quit his job voluntarily, and did not stop working or have his hours reduced for reasons related to COVID-19. For the CRB, the Agent found him not eligible for the periods of October 25, 2020 to August 28, 2021, and September 26, 2021 to October 23, 2021, on the basis that he quit his job voluntarily and did not have a 50% reduction in his average weekly income compared to the previous year due to COVID-19.

Eligibility criteria under the CERB Act and CRB Act

The eligibility criteria for the CERB are set out in the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act, SC 2020, c 5, s 8. Among other things, the CERB Act requires employees or self-employed workers to have earned at least $5,000 in employment income or self-employment income in 2019 or in the 12-month period preceding their application. It also requires the worker to have ceased working for reasons related to COVID-19 for at least 14 consecutive days within the four-week period for which the worker applied. The CRB Act, set out in the Canada Recovery Benefits Act, SC 2020, c 12, s 2, requires applicants to have earned at least $5,000 in employment income or net self-employment income in 2019, 2020, 2021, or in the 12-month period preceding their first application. It additionally requires a 50% drop in average weekly income compared with the previous year for reasons related to COVID-19, along with a requirement to have sought work during the two-week period in which benefits are received. The CRB Act also provides, at paragraphs 3(1)(k) and 3(1)(l), that an applicant must not have quit their employment or voluntarily ceased to work "unless it was reasonable to do so," making the circumstances of job separation a directly relevant consideration in the eligibility assessment.

Procedural fairness and reasonableness deficiencies

The Federal Court found that the Agent did not contact Mr. Leibel to make inquiries about the circumstances of his dismissals or why he left his various employments, thereby denying him a fair opportunity to make submissions on a matter directly relevant to the Agent's assessment. While the Court bore in mind that, in the context of decisions made under the CRB Act and the CERB Act, the level of procedural fairness owed is at the low end of the spectrum, it was clear from the record that Mr. Leibel was not afforded a fair opportunity to respond to the Agent's concerns in that regard. On the substantive reasonableness front, the Agent did not address the reasons why Mr. Leibel decided to leave his employments, despite the provisions of the CRB Act making these reasons a relevant element in the eligibility assessment. Similarly, the Agent's reasons only discussed the conclusion that Mr. Leibel was ineligible because he quit his job voluntarily, with no accounting of the evidence on the record indicating that, in certain instances, Mr. Leibel was dismissed from his job or laid off due to a shortage of work — namely, due to circumstances beyond his control. The Attorney General of Canada conceded both deficiencies.

The Court's ruling and remedy

Justice Gascon of the Federal Court, in a decision rendered on April 23, 2026 (2026 FC 545), granted Mr. Leibel's application for judicial review in part. While Mr. Leibel sought from the Court an order finding him eligible for the benefits claimed, the Court clarified that it is not the Court's role, on judicial review, to determine an applicant's eligibility to the COVID-19 benefits. That authority rests with the Minister of Employment and Social Development, via the CRA. Applying the principles from the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65, the Court emphasized that where a decision reviewed under the reasonableness standard cannot be upheld, it will most often be appropriate to remit the matter to the decision maker for reconsideration, and that the threshold for choosing not to remit is high. The Court noted that a new CRA agent could reasonably arrive at the same decision or could reach a different conclusion more favourable to Mr. Leibel. Accordingly, the CRA's April 25, 2025 decisions were set aside, and Mr. Leibel's files were returned to the CRA for redetermination by a new officer. The Court directed that in this new review, the CRA shall give Mr. Leibel a full and fair opportunity to present his evidence, including new evidence on the circumstances leading to the termination of his jobs, and that he shall be properly informed of the evidence to be rebutted. Mr. Leibel bears the onus of establishing, on a balance of probabilities, that he meets the eligibility criteria to receive the CERB and CRB payments. No costs were awarded, and no specific monetary amount was ordered, as the ultimate eligibility determination remains to be made by the CRA on remand.