Decision A-0436.97
Full Text of Decision A-0436.97
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
No evidence to indicate that any members of the BOR had a bias against the claimant. The fact that a Board member has been on a panel hearing a case involving a relative of the applicant and dealing with an entirely different matter does not constitute bias in law.
Decision 29288
Full Text of Decision 29288
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant states that he had had a good relationship with the Board member whom he knew but finding that individual on the Board threw his concentration. The safer course of action is for the Board member to recuse himself. This avoids any possible suggestion of bias.
Decision 22092
Full Text of Decision 22092
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant is an unsophisticated, barely literate person and was not represented. The situation, despite the chairman's proper disclosure of a 20-year acquaintanceship with that employer, is redolent of a reasonable apprehension of bias in such a case. Heought to have insisted to replace himself.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
acts of violence |
|
|
Decision 21407
Full Text of Decision 21407
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Is there any affiliation between one of the parties and one of the tribunal members: (a) because they are related, (b) because of that member's interest in the dispute, (c) because of an earlier public denunciation of the kind of case that is before the tribunal?
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
natural justice |
defined |
|
Decision 21396
Full Text of Decision 21396
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
She alleged that the Board was not totally impartial in that 1 member was personally known to her. At the hearing before me no mention was made of the bias issue and I am not going to consider it further. Mere acquaintanceship does not imply bias.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
restrictions |
reasonable period of time |
|
Decision 21039
Full Text of Decision 21039
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant had been a member of the executive of a union and also of a Council. The employee representative was well-known to him and they had considerable and many disagreements. That representative led all the discussions at the hearing. Complaint to betreated very seriously.
Decision 21033
Full Text of Decision 21033
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
It is alleged that the Board was not impartial. The Board is a separate entity from the CEIC and appointed to hear appeals from decisions of Insurance Officers. If all 3 members were selected by government or other body, the allegation might be correct but that is not the case.
Decision 20384
Full Text of Decision 20384
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Even s.81 indicates that rehearing by the same referees is not only not unthinkable, but it is legal. This illustrates the genuine possibility of that which is undesirable being nevertheless legal. The referees were not disqualified for having conducteda rehearing.
Decision 19990
Full Text of Decision 19990
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
The argument made demonstrates a misunderstanding of the role of members of Boards; the "employee's representative" on the Board is not required, or permitted, as the claimant submits, to present the employee's case to the other members of the Board.
Decision 19582
Full Text of Decision 19582
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
It is my experience that when an appeal warrants a return to a Board, it ought to be heard, wherever possible, by a different Board. Common sense tells us that the repetition of the earlier decision, even if completely correct, has the appearance of self-justification.
Decision 18652
Full Text of Decision 18652
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
The procedural irregularity consists of having appointed the same Board to hear claimant's case after that Board had ruled against him once before in his absence not having received adequate notice of the hearing.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
natural justice |
notice of hearing |
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
new facts not required |
|
Decision 17855
Full Text of Decision 17855
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Appeal dismissed by Board in the absence of the claimant. Second hearing held before same Board. Case to be heard by a new Board. The claimant was prejudiced by having to appear before a Board which had already decided the issue. This constituted a breach of natural justice.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
contradictory |
|
Decision 15666
Full Text of Decision 15666
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
The presence of claimant's first cousin as member of the Board created the appearance of bias and it does not matter whether the appearance was in favour or against claimant. No need to decide that there was actual bias. Appearance of bias alone constitutes denial of natural justice.
Decision 15570
Full Text of Decision 15570
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
As to Chairman's introduction as CEIC representative, this is obviously improper and a misapprehension of his role. One of the most elementary requirements of natural justice is that no one may sit if he has an interest. The Chairman must not be seen tobe representing the CEIC.
S.76 is not meant to provide that employer's or insured person's representatives act solely in the interests of that party. The composition of a Board is designated so as to have a wide range of labour market experience. To imply that one has a representative was a serious error.
Decision 15506
Full Text of Decision 15506
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant says that the Board was in a conflict of interest position because its members were paid by Government. I do not intend to apply to his submissions with respect to bias, conflict of interest or charges that the Board failed in its obligations. I find no merit in this.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
earnings |
|
|
Decision 15178
Full Text of Decision 15178
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
The brother of a member voted in an employer's board whereby claimant lost his employment after he was involved in a much-publicized fraud in the area. Referee ought to have withdrawn and to have been replaced. [Issue not related to loss of employment]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
absences from home |
out of canada |
|
Decision 14992
Full Text of Decision 14992
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant suggests that there is some element of unfairness in Boards being appointed and paid by the Commission. I do not accept that argument. No evidence that this Board was predisposed in favour of the Commission rather than the claimant.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
warning prior to disentitlement |
|
|
Decision 14856
Full Text of Decision 14856
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
The Board rendered a decision in claimant's absence. Claimant then sought to appear. Same Board reconvened. A different Board should have heard the appeal, otherwise an apprehension of bias certainly exists. This was not a rehearing to clarify some point of evidence.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
minor in extent |
|
|
Decision 14813
Full Text of Decision 14813
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Notice of hearing not received by claimant until after decision of Board. New hearing held by same panel. Same decision. Having the same panel rehear the case leads to an apprehension of bias. Ss.80(a) not met. S.81 used by Umpire to render the decisionin place of the Board.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
misinformation from Commission |
|
|
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
as a requirement |
|
Decision 14552
Full Text of Decision 14552
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant objected to one member who had attended a marriage preparation course with him. To found an allegation of bias, claimant must show a situation that could lead to a reasonable apprehension of bias, though actual bias not required.
Decision 13833
Full Text of Decision 13833
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Appears to me to be inevitable that a member may occasionally know a claimant, an employer or one of their family members personally. That does not make the member ineligible to hear the case.
Decision 11914
Full Text of Decision 11914
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
member ineligible |
|
Summary:
Claimant argues that because members of the Board are employed by the Commission they are unable to give an honest judgment. In answer to that, I adopt the comment given in CUB 6209.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
