| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
binding judgments |
|
Summary:
Of course a decision by a Board in another case is not binding on an Umpire nor does it even constitute jurisprudence.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
weight of statements |
|
Summary:
While he says he would be willing to leave the course, this appears somewhat unlikely as having gone this far preparing himself for his career as barrister and solicitor he would have to receive an unusual employment offer indeed to abandon his intentions.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
pattern study-work as requirement |
|
Summary:
The jurisprudence is well established that a full-time student is deemed unavailable, the 2 exceptions being referral by the Commission and previous pattern of pursuing employment while attending a full-time course.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
binding judgments |
|
Summary:
Of course a decision by a Board in another case is not binding on an Umpire nor does it even constitute jurisprudence.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
not applying jurisprudence |
|
Summary:
Many decisions have held that UI benefits are not intended as a subsidy to enable a claimant to pursue studies. To allow claimant to receive benefits while pursuing a difficult and demanding course would be contrary to jurisprudence and an error in law.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
attending classes |
|
Summary:
Many decisions have held that UI benefits are not intended as a subsidy to enable a claimant to pursue studies. To allow claimant to receive benefits while pursuing a difficult and demanding course would be contrary to jurisprudence and an error in law.
