| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
|
|
Summary:
This case involves an employer appeal of a second Umpire's decision to refer the matter back to a third new board of referees to consider all the evidence in regard to a penalty for issuing a false record of employment. The Court said a Board must justify its conclusions. When the Board is confronted with contradictory elements of evidence, it cannot ignore them. If the Board decides to discard the elements of evidence or to attribute little or no weight to them, it must explain its reasons. The Umpire was justified in chastising the Board for ignoring initial claimant statements spontaneously given in favour of subsequent statements changed and adjusted to suit statements of other persons - this raises an important question of credibility which the Board had the duty to appreciate and justify in its conclusion.
