| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
elected or appointed representative |
|
Summary:
CUB 20996, although a very well-reasoned decision, cannot, I think, be said to have changed the law as set out consistently in previous decisions. If an alderman has no master-servant relationship, reg._57(1)(a) is very broadly worded and refers to a contract of service express or "implied".
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
new facts |
definition |
|
Summary:
If failing in a decision to adopt one line of jurisprudence in preference to another, or decisions rendered subsequently could justify reconsideration of a decision already rendered, the state of the law would be chaotic, not only in UI cases but in allcases of law.
