Decision 30010
| Case Number | Claimant | Judge | Language | Decision date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decision 30010 | Reed | English | 1995-10-23 |
| Decision | Appealed | Appellant | Corresponding Case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Allowed | No | N/A | - |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue 1: | Sub-Issue 2: | Sub-Issue 3: |
|---|---|---|---|
| misconduct | misjudgment |
Summary:
The claimant could not be said to have had the requisite mental intent to constitute misconduct. He was not aware that he was breaking company policy. His conduct may have been an error in judgment but it was not misconduct. Extensive review by Umpire of the jurisprudence in the area of misconduct.