Decision T-2986.92

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
Decision T-2986.92 Plante Réjean  Federal  French 2000-06-06
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Dismissed Unanimous  No Claimant  -


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
reconsideration of claim  overpayment  authority to recover 

Summary:

Claimant argues that following his acquittal of the charge, the Commission should correct its finding that the claimant had made false statements. The result would be that the Commission would have a period of only 3 years, instead of 6, to render its decision. This argument was dismissed by the Court. In the first place, the Commission's notice was delivered in the period before the acquittal. Secondly, the acquittal did not occur after a debate on the merits, but for technical reasons. Moreover, the civil case must not be bound by the criminal case.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
reconsideration of claim  authority to review  time limitation 

Summary:

Claimant argues that following his acquittal of the charge, the Commission should correct its finding that the claimant had made false statements. The result would be that the Commission would have a period of only 3 years, instead of 6, to render its decision. This argument was dismissed by the Court. In the first place, the Commission's notice was delivered in the period before the acquittal. Secondly, the acquittal did not occur after a debate on the merits, but for technical reasons. Moreover, the civil case must not be bound by the criminal case.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
reconsideration of claim  overpayment  time limitation for recovery 

Summary:

Claimant argues that following his acquittal of the charge, the Commission should correct its finding that the claimant had made false statements. The result would be that the Commission would have a period of only 3 years, instead of 6, to render its decision. This argument was dismissed by the Court. In the first place, the Commission's notice was delivered in the period before the acquittal. Secondly, the acquittal did not occur after a debate on the merits, but for technical reasons. Moreover, the civil case must not be bound by the criminal case.


Date modified: