| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
wage-loss indemnity |
group plan |
|
Summary:
Strongly argued that claimant was not an employee of Zymaize, so payments were not payments by employer. This would exclude from earnings all disability payments under 57(2)(c) which rather contemplates former employees and former employer. Argument dismissed. No comment from FC.
As per Umpire, all requirements of 57(4) must be met for a plan to be not a group plan. Here, the Zymaize plan was financed by the company whereas the Labatt plan was not purchased by claimant, so both are group plans. Upheld by FC without comment.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
arising out of any employment |
|
Summary:
Payments received from Labatt, a parent company of Zymaize sold to unrelated company. The disability payment, although not arising out of any employment with Labatt, arises out of former employment with Zymaize and that is sufficient under 57(2)(c). Upheld by FC without comment.
