| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
reduction |
|
Summary:
If the Commission had made a palpable error which the Board failed to disclose, for example if it had fixed the penalty at an amount in excess of the maximum allowed or if it had calculated the penalty on a wrong basis, the Umpire would have been under a duty to refer the matter back to the Board.
The Umpire did not dispute the finding of the Board that the CEIC was correct in imposing a penalty, it being clear that claimant had knowingly made false statements. The Umpire does not have jurisdiction to substitute his own discretion for that of the CEIC with regard to the amount of the penalty.
