| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
request for review |
new facts to BOR, Umpire or Commission |
Summary:
Claimant disqualified for having voluntarily left his employment without just cause. Decision upheld by BOR and Umpire. Claimant sought reconsideration by way of a decision rendered by an adjudicator under the Labour Standards Act (LSA). Decision maintained by Umpire. FCA held that reconsideration of the umpire's decision based on the decision of an adjudicator made in paralleled proceedings taken pursuant to the LSA was unnecessary since the factual conclusions of the adjudicator were not "new facts" within S.86 of the U.I. Act and were irrelevant to the issues before the umpire.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
reconsideration of claim |
new facts |
definition |
Summary:
Claimant disqualified for having voluntarily left his employment without just cause. Decision upheld by BOR and Umpire. Claimant sought reconsideration by way of a decision rendered by an adjudicator under the Labour Standards Act (LSA). Decision maintained by Umpire. FCA held that reconsideration of the umpire's decision based on the decision of an adjudicator made in paralleled proceedings taken pursuant to the LSA was unnecessary since the factual conclusions of the adjudicator were not "new facts" within S.86 of the U.I. Act and were irrelevant to the issues before the umpire.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
decision by another body |
Summary:
Claimant disqualified for having voluntarily left his employment without just cause. Decision upheld by BOR and Umpire. Claimant sought reconsideration by way of a decision rendered by an adjudicator under the Labour Standards Act (LSA). Decision maintained by Umpire. FCA held that reconsideration of the umpire's decision based on the decision of an adjudicator made in paralleled proceedings taken pursuant to the LSA was unnecessary since the factual conclusions of the adjudicator were not "new facts" within S.86 of the U.I. Act and were irrelevant to the issues before the umpire.
