| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
natural justice |
free of bias |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law when it failed to find that there had been a breach of natural justice in the treatment accorded by the Commission to the claimant: the right to have his claim processed quickly and objectively and to expect assistance as noted inthe brochure.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
clarification |
|
Summary:
According to the application, not willing to work immediately as layoff temporary and would be returning to old job. Statement ambiguous and not conclusive. It was open to him to prove that he had in fact conducted a legitimate job search. Nothing prevented him changing his mind.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
job search |
how to search |
|
Summary:
Ambiguous statement on file regarding non-availability. Claimant contacted 10 potential employers by phone. The Commission checked with 4 who said they had no written application and cited this as not backing up his job search but this does not contradict claimant's evidence.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
denial of natural justice |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law when it failed to find that there had been a breach of natural justice in the treatment accorded by the Commission to the claimant: the right to have his claim processed quickly and objectively and to expect assistance as noted inthe brochure.
