Summary of Issue: Authority To Reexamine

Decision A0512.07 Full Text of Decision A0512.07

The claimant is a full-time university student. He is only available for work during certain hours and days of the week. His chances of finding employment are therefore limited because of his restrictions. Thus, the Umpire did not commit any error when he determined that the claimant did not establish that he was available for work during his period of full-time studies. In addition, the FCA concluded that the claimant could not introduce new evidence because the pre-existing conditions necessary to introduce such evidence did not exist.

Decision A-0594.01 Full Text of Decision A-0594.01

The Court concluded that the claimant was bound by the position her counsel took in front of the Umpire and she could not raise new factual issues that were not in front of the Umpire.

Decision A-0248.01 Full Text of Decision A-0248.01

Proof of misconduct is first a question of fact arising from the record as a whole and including the testimony given at the hearing. The absence of the transcript of the memoranda substantially limited a full assessment of the facts by the Umpire. The Court found that the record, as constituted, did not allow it to intervene on a finding of fact, and the application for judicial review was summarily dismissed.

Decision 50988 Full Text of Decision 50988

See summary indexed under FCA A-0248.01

Decision 25450 Full Text of Decision 25450

S. 86 is not intended to enable a claimant to re-argue the appeal before an Umpire who has already rendered a decision unless there is new evidence of a decisive nature which was not available at the time of the hearing.

Decision 19484 Full Text of Decision 19484

When claimant is not provided with notice of hearing, the decision of the Board must be considered a nullity. It is better to arrange rehearing before a different Board. If impossible, it is essential that the Board start afresh and not be limited to 'new evidence' under s.86.

Decision 12836 Full Text of Decision 12836

Appeal procedure brought to a definitive conclusion by the Board. Later induced to reverse its previous and validly rendered decision. Clearly the second decision is a nullity. If it be too late for the Commission to resort to s.86 as stated in VON FINDENIGG once the appeal procedure to the Board had been invoked, then a fortiori too it was too late once the appeal procedure is brought to a definitive conclusion.

Decision 12787 Full Text of Decision 12787

Hearing by board on 2-7; disentitlement upheld; insured said had found a babysitter on 2-8. Duty of CEIC to reconsider. New facts demanding new decision and new right of appeal.