| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
FCA declared that the question as to whether and for how long the claimant was in insurable employment is one which neither the BOR nor the Umpire has power to decide.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
errors in law |
excess of jurisdiction |
|
Summary:
FCA found that the Umpire erred in law when he allocated pursuant to s. 57 & 58 of the Reg., a sum received by the claimant for unjust dismissal and then treated those weeks as weeks of insurable employment.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
insurability |
awards |
|
Summary:
FCA found that the Umpire erred in law when he allocated pursuant to s. 57 & 58 of the Reg., a sum received by the claimant for unjust dismissal and then treated those weeks as weeks of insurable employment.** FCA stated that a person who has been dismissed or otherwise separated from his or her employment, and receives compensation therefor, ceases to be employed. The fact that the compensation may be allocated for purposes of calculating benefits to some number of weeks following the dismissal doesn't mean that the person continues in that insurable employment which by definition has come to an end.
