| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
legal presumption |
|
Summary:
The effect of a legal presumption [monies paid for wrongful dimissal are earnings under s. 57 and 58] cannot be destroyed by referring to a conjecture or an opinion based on experience [in order to exclude intangibles from earnings].
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
Summary:
The effect of a legal presumption cannot be destroyed by referring to a conjecture. Nothing in the evidence suggests that the monies paid were intended to cover any damage other than the loss of salary or pecuniary benefits associated with the employment lost.
The rule that clearly emerges from s. 57 and 58 is where there are no special circumstances, any amount paid by an employer to a laid-off or dimissed employee is paid as compensation for loss of income. See WALFORD.
In view of the presumption created by the rule in s. 57 and 58, the full amount paid in settlement of unlawful dismissal is to be regarded as income arising out of employment subject to allocation.
