| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
circumstances |
time spent |
|
Summary:
The claimant argued that the Board of Referees and the Umpire had failed to consider whether the claimant could and should benefit from the exception provided under s. 43(2) of the EIR. The Court ruled that although the Board of Referees did not expressly use the language employed in s. 43(2), it seemed clear, from a reading of the record, that the Board considered the exception. The Board of Referees correctly assessed the facts, the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses and, there being no palpable and obvious errors, the Umpire carefully refrained from becoming involved in these matters.
