Decision A-0930.96
Full Text of Decision A-0930.96
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
identify issue |
Summary:
FCA ruled that when a notice of appeal is filed before the process defined in subsection 43(1) is completed, this notice is premature and nothing prevents the Commission from completing the process. The Commission may go so far as to complete the process by giving notice of the overpayment amount contained in its written submissions to the BOR. Consequently, in the case at bar, the appeal notice filed by the claimant was premature, as he had not yet been notified of the amount of the overpayment.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
calculation |
|
reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
claimant's request |
reconsideration of claim by Commission |
Decision T-0472.88
Full Text of Decision T-0472.88
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
identify issue |
Summary:
Under ss. 43(1), the reconsideration of a situation which does not alter an earlier decision is not appealable under ss. 43(2). Only decisions that alter an earlier decision are appealable.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
change in jurisprudence |
|
reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
claimant's request |
reconsideration of claim by Commission |
Decision 10722
Full Text of Decision 10722
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
identify issue |
Summary:
Claimant advised that he was not eligible for referral to course. He did not appeal the decision. Assuming without deciding that there might have been a right of appeal, the Commission is under no obligation at law to give legal advice as to this possibility. See MERCIER.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
not a ground of entitlement |
|
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
responsibility |
Decision 24683
Full Text of Decision 24683
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
responsibility |
Summary:
The first reason (advanced as special reason under s. 82) is that the claimant was not advised by the Commission or the Board of his right to appeal to an Umpire. The simple reason for this is that there is no statutory obligation for them to do so.
Decision 10722
Full Text of Decision 10722
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
responsibility |
Summary:
Claimant advised that he was not eligible for referral to course. He did not appeal the decision. Assuming without deciding that there might have been a right of appeal, the Commission is under no obligation at law to give legal advice as to this possibility. See MERCIER.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
reconsideration of claim |
errors by Commission |
not a ground of entitlement |
|
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
identify issue |
Decision T-2531.81
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
who |
Summary:
For an employee to have a right of appeal under s.79, he must be a claimant. He can be a claimant only if he has applied for benefit which means UI benefits. Decision by Commission regarding premium rate reduction allowed to employer cannot be appealed.
Decision A-0647.78
Full Text of Decision A-0647.78
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
appeal system |
right of appeal |
who |
Summary:
Section 79 (now section 114) of the Act confers a right of appeal on "claimant" as defined aggrieved by a decision of the Commission on a claim or reconsideration under section 43 (now section 52) of the EIA. Paragraph 44(i) (now 54(k)) was not intented to authorize and Regulation 175 (now 56) do not provide for appeals against the Commission's refusal to write-off an overpayment.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
recourse |