| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
The Board of Referees changed the noted violation to a minor violation as a result of reducing the penalty. The evidence on record shows that this was a subsequent violation and the Umpire found that the Board exceeded its jurisdiction and rendered a decision which is wrong in law.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
penalties |
violation |
|
Summary:
As a result of reducing the penalty, the Board of Referees changed the noted violation to a minor violation. Evidence on the record shows that this was a subsequent violation and, accordingly, it could not be treated as a minor violation. The Umpire concluded that the subsequent violation precluded the action of the Board and allowed the Commission appeal.
