| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
definition |
|
|
Summary:
The Board ruled that there was no conclusive evidence to prove gross misconduct. This makes it unclear as to whether it applied the right test in law which is that of "misconduct". Not sufficiently careful in the statement of its findings.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
without regard for material |
|
Summary:
While the Board notes "new evidence", it does not say whether it accepts or rejects this material. No finding as to whether the statement signed is credible and what weight should be given it. This gives rise to the possibility that it did not take thatstatement into account.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
evidence new |
witnesses |
Summary:
The Board ruled that there was no proof of misconduct. On appeal, the employer was prepared to produce persons as witnesses. I declined to hear new evidence on credibility which is a matter for the Board. This was available at time of the Board hearing.Not entitled to have it heard now.
