| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
applicability |
proof |
|
Summary:
Up to claimant to prove availability, and not to Commission to establish that claimant was not available.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
contradictory |
|
Summary:
It is also recognized in the case law that a claimant's first statement is generally the one that best reflects the situation at the time while subsequent statements tend rather to justify the claimant once disentitled.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
extent of availability required |
|
Summary:
To be viable, availability must not be fettered by excessive restrictions. Prima facie, a claimant who rules out the first three working days of the week from the outset seriously limits his availability.
