| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
decision maintained |
|
Summary:
Reference to ss. 44(1) replaced by 42(4) after claimant's appeal. HAMILTON and VON FINDENIGG referred to. I think it is illogical to hold against the CEIC what is a rather minor error, as it had no obligation to do so. Claimant had fully understood the content of the notice.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
second notice found valid |
|
Summary:
Reference to ss. 44(1) replaced by 42(4) after claimant's appeal. HAMILTON and VON FINDENIGG referred to. I think it is illogical to hold against the CEIC what is a rather minor error, as it had no obligation to do so. Claimant had fully understood the content of the notice.
