| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
breach of rules |
|
|
Summary:
Claimant lost his employment due to a breach of company policy when he submitted inaccurate expense reports. Umpire reversed the BOR's decision on the fact that claimant's grievance was accepted and he was reinstated in his position. FCA set aside Umpire's decision on the basis that he can't overturned the BOR's decision without first determining that BOR's decision was erroneous in light of s. 80 of the Act. Also, Court pointed out that the first question that should had been answered by the Umpire is whether the BOR applied the right test in deciding that claimant's behaviour amounted to misconduct.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
Claimant lost his employment due to a breach of company policy when he submitted inaccurate expense reports. Umpire reversed the BOR's decision on the fact that claimant's grievance was accepted and he was reinstated in his position. FCA set aside Umpire's decision on the basis that he can't overturned the BOR's decision without first determining that BOR's decision was erroneous in light of s. 80 of the Act. Also, Court pointed out that the first question that should had been answered by the Umpire is whether the BOR applied the right test in deciding that claimant's behaviour amounted to misconduct.
