Decision 40243
Full Text of Decision 40243
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
BOR in its decision to find falsity used the words "knowingly or should have known". Umpire found those words neutralized the word "knowingly" and ruled that BOR erred in adopting them as they do not meet the test according to the legislative provisions to determine falsity.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
official wordings differ |
|
Decision 37118A
Full Text of Decision 37118A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Dismissed for having failed to indicate instances of lateness in his daily report. BOR claimed that these actions constituted dishonesty or fraud. Umpire ruled that the BOR had committed an error of law in finding that acts of which the claimant was accused constituted misconduct according to the meaning given to that term in s. 28(1) of the Act, since the claimant’s supervisor was the first person to be informed of his lateness. Consequently, the claimant never intended to rob his employer.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
lateness |
|
|
| misconduct |
definition |
|
|
Decision 22097
Full Text of Decision 22097
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-1691.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study approved |
|
Decision A-1691.92
Full Text of Decision A-1691.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The meaning to be given to the words "without just cause" being a question of law, we feel it irreconcilable with the very purpose of the Act to conclude that the claimant was justified in acting as she did (voluntarily leaving to attend a course). Reference to TANGUAYin re error of law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
courses of study approved |
|
Decision 23676
Full Text of Decision 23676
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Both counsels acknowledged the fact that the Board failed to delineate what facts constituted misconduct pursuant to the jurisprudence cited (CUBs 21645, 16547 and 22649). By failing so to do, a reversible error in law was committed.
Decision A-0599.92
Full Text of Decision A-0599.92
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Whether a sum paid is a "pension" is a question of law. O'CONNOR quoted. Another characteristic of a pension relates to the level of control the recipient exercises over the pension fund. The true nature of the monies should be determined. Upheld by the FC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
severance pay |
definition |
|
| earnings |
income |
nature of monies |
|
| earnings |
pension |
definition |
|
| earnings |
income |
non-competitive clause |
|
Decision 20965
Full Text of Decision 20965
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0599.92
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
nature of monies |
|
| earnings |
severance pay |
definition |
|
| earnings |
pension |
definition |
|
| earnings |
income |
non-competitive clause |
|
Decision 22477
Full Text of Decision 22477
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
In CUB 18653, I held it was an error in law for a Board to refer to "just cause" in considering a disqualification under s. 27. The test for "good cause" has been well established by the case law as being what a reasonable and prudent person would have done in similar circumstances.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
good cause |
|
|
| refusal of work |
babysitting arrangements |
|
|
| refusal of work |
personal constraints |
after confinement |
|
| refusal of work |
transportation difficulties |
|
|
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
family obligations |
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
part-time work |
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
evidence new |
|
Decision 21506
Full Text of Decision 21506
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law. If the beneficiary, through ignorance, made false statements as it says in its decision, it's because she did not "knowingly" make false statements.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
Decision 20371
Full Text of Decision 20371
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
CUB 13920 quoted. I fully concur that the determination of what constitutes "just cause" is a question of fact which falls particularly within the jurisdictional province of Boards of Referees. An Umpire appeal is not a hearing de novo.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
not a trial de novo |
|
Decision 19519
Full Text of Decision 19519
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
No longer able to accept evening shift after childbirth. Employment held not suitable by Board. Error of law. Under s.27 suitability depends on the work conditions themselves and not on one's personal circumstances. Personal affairs to be arranged to achieve that availability.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
suitability |
defined |
|
Decision 18653
Full Text of Decision 18653
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Parliament did not intend that "good cause" and "just cause" be treated as synonymous. I find that the Board erred in law in its reference to "just cause" when it considered the reasons for the claimant's failure to attend the course.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
definition |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
failure to attend |
leaving the course |
|
| courses of instruction or training |
good cause |
definition |
|
Decision 17682
Full Text of Decision 17682
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Board erred in law in relying on Black's Law Dictionary to preclude an honorarium received by the claimant for his elected position as a Band Councillor from being considered as earnings.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
elected or appointed representative |
|
Decision 14807
Full Text of Decision 14807
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Board found that claimant did not intend his answer to be misleading or to misrepresent his situation. Nevertheless, the Board did not eliminate the penalty but simply reduced it. This was an error of law.
Decision 14738
Full Text of Decision 14738
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Voluntary termination justified in part according to the board and disqualification reduced from 6 to 2 weeks. Error in law. Can one be justified in part according to 28? In my opinion, no. It is not appropriate to question whether the justification can be partial or complete.
Decision 14576
Full Text of Decision 14576
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Whether one is available and seeking employment is a question of mixed law and fact. The construction of the word "available" is a matter of law; its application to the particular circumstances is a matter of fact.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
job search |
incomplete information |
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
evidence new |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
how to search |
|
| board of referees |
right to be heard |
employer |
|
| availability for work |
job search |
number of contacts |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
availability concept |
|
Decision 13838
Full Text of Decision 13838
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Act does not define just cause. The definition is a question of law. Just cause is not synonymous with reason or motive. Not sufficient for one to prove he acted reasonably. Reasonableness may be good cause but not necessarily just cause.
Decision 13728
Full Text of Decision 13728
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Board found that the claimant had just cause for refusing the position and reduced the suspension to 3 weeks. The Board erred in law. Having found that the claimant had just cause, it has no jurisdiction to impose any disqualification period.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
good cause |
|
|
Decision 13629
Full Text of Decision 13629
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The definition of "just cause" is purely a question of law. Its application as to whether an employee was justified in leaving is one of fact. Just cause is not synonymous with reason or motive.
Decision A-0381.85
Full Text of Decision A-0381.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Since claimant's admission of impairment was admission of a fact only, and not of the requisite mental state, the Board considered proof of a mental element unnecessary, so that ss. 28(1) relating to misconduct does not require wilfulness or recklessness. Error of law.
It is argued that the meaning of an ordinary word of the English language is not a question of law. This question was put to rest in BEDELL where the Court said that the construction of the word 'misconduct' is a question of law.
When a word appears in a statutory context, it is for a Court to interpret that word as a matter of law. The construction of a statutory word is a matter of law; its application to particular facts is a matter of fact.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
definition |
|
|
| misconduct |
substance abuse |
|
|
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
selection of one ground |
|
Decision A-1496.84
Full Text of Decision A-1496.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Commission erred in law as it ignored the definition of income in Reg. 57 and the particular requirement of 57(6)(d) in concluding that the value of accommodation and horse board was not insurable earnings. [p. 10]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
responsibility for ui administration |
|
|
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
computation |
|
| basic concepts |
insurability |
non-monetary |
|
| basic concepts |
insurability |
jurisdiction |
|
| earnings |
income |
in kind |
|
Decision A-1458.84
Full Text of Decision A-1458.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
While question of whether an employee had just cause is one of fact, the question of the definition of just cause is purely a question of law. Error of law if decision cannot be reconciled with definition. [p. 4]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
altruistic considerations |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
monetary considerations |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
definition |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
rationale |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
retirement |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
a requirement |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
delay between two jobs |
|
Decision 11179
Full Text of Decision 11179
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Board found that "misstatements were made innocently" and, therefore, erred in law in holding that any penalty should be imposed since such a finding precludes a finding that claimant knowingly made a false statement.
Decision 10615
Full Text of Decision 10615
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Board concluded that insured had just cause for leaving, and accordingly reduced disqualification from 6 weeks to 3. Mitigating circumstances may be considered only where insured left without just cause.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
duration of disqualification |
|
Decision A-1865.83
Full Text of Decision A-1865.83
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The meaning of "full working week" in 21(1) is a question of law; whether particular weeks are full working weeks may turn on questions of fact. [p. 17]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
full working week |
|
|
| antedate |
ignorance of the law |
not an excuse |
|
| antedate |
waiting for job |
searching for work |
|
| antedate |
disentitlement period at issue |
employed |
|
| basic concepts |
rate of benefit |
computation |
|
Decision A-1716.83
Full Text of Decision A-1716.83
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
Not necessary to attempt definition, perhaps undesirable to do so. Whether one's conduct is misconduct will depend largely on the circumstances of each case. The construction of a word is a question of law. Whether a particular act is misconduct is a question of fact.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
refusal to obey orders |
|
|
| misconduct |
definition |
|
|
| board of referees |
constitution of board |
change of members |
|
Decision A-1607.83
Full Text of Decision A-1607.83
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The decision of the Board was based in part upon a misinterpretation of the settlement agreement in which payment is described as damages. This would constitute an error in law and permit an Umpire to vary the decision.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
Decision A-0440.83
Full Text of Decision A-0440.83
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
According to board, claimant was dismissed as result of simple disagreement with employer with no ill will on either part. It therefore erred in law in finding misconduct.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
misunderstandings |
|
|
Decision A-0613.81
Full Text of Decision A-0613.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
meaning of a term |
|
Summary:
The Umpire erred in law in saying that babysitting difficulties amounted to good cause, given the conclusion that claimant could not restrict her availability to the extent she had. If not available due to these difficulties, these cannot amount to goodcause. [p._15]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| refusal of work |
babysitting arrangements |
|
|
| basic concepts |
disqualification and disentitlement |
|
|
| availability for work |
restrictions |
hours of work |
|
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
good reasons |
|
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
family obligations |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
availability concept |
|
