| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of provision |
|
Summary:
Claimant alleged that it was not fair to convert his hours worked, 44 hours per week, and take into account only 35 hours per week under the Regulations, giving him only 735 hours of insurable employment when 910 hours were required. BOR reversed the Commission’s decision and allowed 44 hours per week. Umpire stated that it was the government that had chosen the rule of 35 hours, it being the average number of hours currently worked in Canada. He found that section 94.1 of the Regulations had been applied correctly and that BOR had erred in law in forgetting the relevant rules in the Act and Regulations.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
basic concepts |
number of hours required |
|
Summary:
Claimant alleged that it was not fair to convert his hours worked, 44 hours per week, and take into account only 35 hours per week under the Regulations, giving him only 735 hours of insurable employment when 910 hours were required. BOR reversed the Commission’s decision and allowed 44 hours per week. Umpire stated that it was the government that had chosen the rule of 35 hours, it being the average number of hours currently worked in Canada. He found that section 94.1 of the Regulations had been applied correctly and that BOR had erred in law in forgetting the relevant rules in the Act and Regulations.
