Decision 17067
| Case Number | Claimant | Judge | Language | Decision date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decision 17067 | Rouleau | English | 1989-10-03 |
| Decision | Appealed | Appellant | Corresponding Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dismissed | No | N/A | - |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue 1: | Sub-Issue 2: | Sub-Issue 3: |
|---|---|---|---|
| basic concepts | insurability | number of weeks | maximum |
Summary:
Claimant submits that the definition of week in 2(1)(y) does not apply to calculation of insurable weeks which ought to coincide with pay periods and premiums. Regardless of the logic of this argument, reg. 36(6) makes it clear that 2(1)(y) applies.