Law360 Canada (April 23, 2024, 1:46 PM EDT) -- Application by Butu for judicial review of the Social Security Tribunal ("SST") Appeal Division's ("SST-AD") refusal to grant leave to appeal the General Division's ("SST-GD") decision to uphold the Canada Employment Insurance Commission's ("Commission") refusal of her employment insurance ("EI") benefits. Butu was employed by the Toronto Public Library ("TPL"). The TPL introduced a COVID-19 vaccination policy that required all employees to provide proof of their vaccination status and to be fully vaccinated or obtain an exemption, failure of which would merit a suspension without pay. Butu did not confirm her vaccination status and was suspended without pay. She requested TPL through registered mail to be exempted from the policy on religious grounds. She resubmitted her request through email. TPL appeared to have no record of her accommodation request. Subsequently, she was terminated for misconduct due to failure to comply with the COVID-19 vaccination policy. The Commission denied her EI benefits as she was found to be disqualified due to her misconduct. On appeal, the SST-GD affirmed the Commission's decision as she was aware that her refusal to disclose her vaccination status would lead to her termination. Butu applied for leave to appeal the decision to the SST-AD. The SST-AD refused her application for leave to appeal as the SST-AD found that Butu's appeal did not have a reasonable chance of success. Butu submitted that the SST-AD erred in law by not granting her leave to appeal. Particularly, she took issue with the SST-AD's conclusion that the SST-GD found that her conduct was willful and that her behaviour breached an express or implied duty that arose from her employment contract. She argued, among other things, that her actions did not constitute misconduct because compliance with the COVID-19 vaccination policy was not an express or implied condition of her employment nor part of her collective agreement....