| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
incapacity vs self-employment |
|
|
Summary:
The Board awarded him benefits on the basis that he did not work during his period of incapacitation, but failed to note that his enterprise was such that it still operated as a going concern and a profitable concern during his time away from the business. The Board made a clear error in law.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
money invested in business |
|
|
Summary:
The amount of money he invested, $20,000, would normally demonstrate an attempt to make such an endeavour (used furniture operation) profitable.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
incomes |
|
|
Summary:
He indicated that last year's gross returns were $87,000, which clearly supports the belief that his used furniture operation constituted his principal means of livelihood, especially when it is compared to the income earned from his part-time employment, that of working at a gas station.
