| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
applicability |
|
Summary:
Despite the FCA decision in Hoek (A-0089.99) which determined that Reg. 94.1 is clearly mandatory, the dissenting member held that Reg. 94.1 was not. He was of the view that since the reasons expressed in the Hoek decision did not contain any reference to the interpretative approaches laid down in Abrahams, Hills and Normandin, he considered that he did not have to follow that decision.**NOTE: It was agreed not to appeal this case to the Supreme Court on that particular issue, the Commission being of the opinion that the FCA decision rendered in Hoek represents the correct interpretation of the law.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
appeals |
|
Summary:
The number of insurable hours is a question that shall be determined by an authorized officer of the Department of National Revenue. Neither the BOR and correlatively the Umpire had the jurisdiction to determine whether the claimant had a sufficient number of insurable hours in insurable employment to qualify for employment insurance benefits. Reference made to other FCA's decisions in Valentine (A-0241.98), Vautour (A-0733.98) and Kaur (A-0487.93).
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
number of hours |
|
Summary:
Despite the FCA decision in Hoek (A-0089.99) which determined that Reg. 94.1 is clearly mandatory, the dissenting member held that Reg. 94.1 was not. He was of the view that since the reasons expressed in the Hoek decision did not contain any reference to the interpretative approaches laid down in Abrahams, Hills and Normandin, he considered that he did not have to follow that decision.**NOTE: It was agreed not to appeal this case to the Supreme Court on that particular issue, the Commission being of the opinion that the FCA decision rendered in Hoek represents the correct interpretation of the law.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
The number of insurable hours is a question that shall be determined by an authorized officer of the Department of National Revenue. Neither the BOR and correlatively the Umpire had the jurisdiction to determine whether the claimant had a sufficient number of insurable hours in insurable employment to qualify for employment insurance benefits. Reference made to other FCA's decisions in Valentine (A-0241.98), Vautour (A-0733.98) and Kaur (A-0487.93).
