| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
conditions required |
7 days without earnings |
|
Summary:
The Commission determined that the claimant was not unemployed because he did not have seven consecutive days without work and earnings. The facts were that three employment benefits were still extended to the claimant after he was laid off: the use of a vehicle, cellular telephone and credit card. The claimant owned a business for 25 years, in 2004 sold the company to his son-in-law. In a statutory declaration, the son-in-law indicated that the claimant helped him out during the busy period doing estimates. Part of the favourable purchase price and considerations on the sale balance, the purchaser agreed to let the vendor continue using the truck, the gas card and the cellular telephone until June 2009 which saved him $300K. The Board found that there was no link between the claimant's employment and the benefits that he received. The appeal is dismissed.
