| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
not to be read strictly |
|
Summary:
It is recognized that Board decisions should not be examined microscopically. Board members are not usually legally trained. But the decision should contain enough of an exposition to enable an Umpire to be satisfied that the correct legal standard was applied.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
oral evidence |
|
Summary:
There is no rule against Umpires hearing viva voce evidence particularly when a Board's decision is faulty but I do not think it appropriate to do so here. Claimant's request has taken the Commission by surprise who considers it would be prejudiced if new evidence heard.
