| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
court judgments or out-of-court settlements |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant was dismissed for allegedly selling tax-free tobacco while at work. Subsequent to the dismissal, the claimant and the employer agreed on minutes of settlement significantly altering the initial reason for dismissal. It was reasonable for the Umpire to conclude that the settlement minutes contradict a finding of misconduct on the claimant's part. Before a settlement agreement can be used to contradict an earlier finding of misconduct, there must be some evidence in respect of the misconduct which would contradict the position taken by the employer. The Court said that altogether the terms of the agreement in this case can reasonably be understood to contradict a finding of misconduct. The Court took into account its decision in Boulton (A-45-96).
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
|
|
Summary:
In a case of misconduct, the Umpire allowed in evidence Minutes of Settlement between the claimant and the employer which were not before the Board. The Commission argued that the settlement minutes were inadmissible before the Umpire since they existed prior to the Board hearing. Whether the settlement minutes constituted "new facts" or a material fact that was unknown to the Board at the time of their decision, the decision of the Umpire to admit the minutes into evidence was permissible under section 120 of the Act. The Court took into account its decision in Dubois (A-728-97).
