| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
proof |
|
|
Summary:
The Board misdirected itself when it said claimant was not able to prove that the allegations were not true. In the light of the third hand evidence before the Board, it should have considered whether the Commission discharged the heavy burden of proof upon it.
As this is a matter of alleged misconduct giving rise to a dismissal from employment there is a heavy burden upon the Commission to prove that misconduct. It cannot simply be presumed.
The evidence is a report by employee of company of contents of film which he may or may not have seen to employee of CEIC and then a report by CEIC to the Board of what employer's employee told CEIC employee. This is of questionable value, and claimant denies allegations.
