| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
applicability |
implicit request |
|
Summary:
He had not made his claim in 12-85 as it was his intention to do when he attended the office. The mere intention to do something can, in no circumstances, be equated to the doing of the thing. If the law clearly requires the doing of an act, the intention to do it is not enough.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| claim procedure |
applicability |
general |
|
Summary:
He had not made his claim in 12-85 as it was his intention to do when he attended the office. The mere intention to do something can, in no circumstances, be equated to the doing of the thing. If the law clearly requires the doing of an act, the intention to do it is not enough.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
acquired rights |
|
Summary:
It is now well established that a claimant has no vested right that the rules under which benefits will be paid to him on a weekly basis will remain fixed and immutable after the moment he makes his claim. Any change in those rules will be applicable to him.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
pension |
as income |
|
Summary:
Even if the pension had been effective in 12-85 and a claim filed immediately, that would not have prevented the new regulation from being applicable from the moment it came into force and the pension monies received from then on deductible from the benefits otherwise payable.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
Summary:
Even if the pension had been effective in 12-85 and a claim filed immediately, that would not have prevented the new regulation from being applicable from the moment it came into force and the pension monies received from then on deductible from the benefits otherwise payable.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
intent and object |
|
Summary:
In no circumstances can the mere intention to do something be equated to the doing of the thing. If the law clearly requires the doing of an act, the mere intention to do the act will not suffice.
