Decision A-0235.97

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
Decision A-0235.97 Lavallière Michel  Federal  French 1998-01-20
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Allowed Majority  No Claimant 


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  errors in law  weight of statements 

Summary:

Umpire found that BOR had erred in assessing the whole matter, and consequently had erred in law, in finding that the claimant could not rely upon his business as a principal means of livelihood. Umpire thus ruled that the documentary evidence accumulated in the record was convincing, and that the claimant was not unemployed. FCA set aside the Umpire’s decision and referred the matter back to the Umpire to be disposed of, taking it for granted that the errors that the BOR might have committed in assessing the evidence did not justify the Umpire’s intervention.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
umpires  errors in law  excess of jurisdiction 

Summary:

Umpire found that BOR had erred in assessing the whole matter, and consequently had erred in law, in finding that the claimant could not rely upon his business as a principal means of livelihood. Umpire thus ruled that the documentary evidence accumulated in the record was convincing, and that the claimant was not unemployed. FCA set aside the Umpire’s decision and referred the matter back to the Umpire to be disposed of, taking it for granted that the errors that the BOR might have committed in assessing the evidence did not justify the Umpire’s intervention.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
proof  errors in law  rules of evidence 

Summary:

Umpire found that BOR had erred in assessing the whole matter, and consequently had erred in law, in finding that the claimant could not rely upon his business as a principal means of livelihood. Umpire thus ruled that the documentary evidence accumulated in the record was convincing, and that the claimant was not unemployed. FCA set aside the Umpire’s decision and referred the matter back to the Umpire to be disposed of, taking it for granted that the errors that the BOR might have committed in assessing the evidence did not justify the Umpire’s intervention.


Date modified: