| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
Summary:
Umpire declared the creation of the overpayment wrongful because it did not meet the requirements of subsection 43(1) of the Act and wrote off the amount. On the same grounds as those outlined in Girard (A-6-97), the FCA allowed the Commission's application for judicial review, reversed the Umpire's decision and ordered that the BOR decision upholding the Commission's determination be maintained.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
question not at issue |
|
Summary:
Umpire declared the creation of the overpayment wrongful because it did not meet the requirements of subsection 43(1) of the Act and wrote off the amount. On the same grounds as those outlined in Girard (A-6-97), the FCA allowed the Commission's application for judicial review, reversed the Umpire's decision and ordered that the BOR decision upholding the Commission's determination be maintained.
