Decision 21161
Full Text of Decision 21161
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board did not determine if the claimant's self-employed activities were so minor in extent as to be such that they would not normally be followed as a principal means of livelihood. To fail to address the issue of minor in extent is an error in law.
Decision 18068
Full Text of Decision 18068
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The main reason the Board's decision cannot stand is that it committed an error of law in not considering whether, despite the fact that the claimant was engaged in a co-adventure, that activity was so minor in extent as to fall under reg. 43(2).
Decision 16650
Full Text of Decision 16650
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
It has been held in a number of cases that it is an error in law not to consider whether an activity is so minor in extent under reg. 43(2). It is the Board's responsibility to consider 43(2). Six factors are set out in CUB 5454 to be considered.
Decision 15923
Full Text of Decision 15923
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board erred in part when it found that claimant was not available. The issue related to claimant's employment under ss.21(1) and reg. 43(1)(b), not whether he was available. The Board also erred in law by failing to consider whether the employment was minor in extent.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
preparatory activities in commencing business |
|
|
| board of referees |
issue not recognized |
error by board |
|
Decision 15652
Full Text of Decision 15652
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board did not consider whether claimant's activities were minor in extent. This failure constituted an error of law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
applicability |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
minor in extent |
|
|
| week of unemployment |
restaurants |
|
|
Decision 15332
Full Text of Decision 15332
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
This Board erred in law in failing to consider whether the employment was so minor in extent that a person would not normally follow it as a principal means of livelihood.
Decision 14001
Full Text of Decision 14001
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0715.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Decision A-0715.87
Full Text of Decision A-0715.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board totally ignored ss. 43(2) as to whether claimant's employment was minor in extent. Since this was an error in law, the Umpire allowed the appeal. Judgment quashed by FC because Umpire failed to make a finding under ss. 43(2).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Decision 12922A
Full Text of Decision 12922A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board committed an error in law by failing to address itself to the question of the possible application of reg. 43(2). Case referred back to the Board.
Decision 13687
Full Text of Decision 13687
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board's decision contains an error of law. No determination is made as to whether the claimant's self-employment activities were minor in extent.
Decision 13103
Full Text of Decision 13103
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
If board decides that claimant falls under Reg. 43(1), it has obligation to ask whether insured's employment in business minor in extent within meaning of 43(2); otherwise, error of law.
Decision 12905
Full Text of Decision 12905
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
Board did not consider Reg. 43(2). This omission is undeniably an error of law. Nonetheless, apepars that insured devoted too much time and energy not to want to make it his principal means of livelihood.
Decision 12061A
Full Text of Decision 12061A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The simple affirmation that the claimant is self-employed cannot justify the Board's decision to disentitle without giving consideration to reg. 43(2). Error in law.
Decision 12759
Full Text of Decision 12759
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
In omitting to address itself to the possible application of reg. 43(2), the Board undeniably committed an error in law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
minor in extent |
|
|
Decision 11918
Full Text of Decision 11918
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
In failing to pay any regard to the saving provisions of reg. 43(2), the Board committed a serious error in law.
Decision 11266
Full Text of Decision 11266
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
It was an error of law by the Board to merely conclude that because claimant had the intention of making his business his main means of livelihood, he was unavailable, without giving consideration to whether this employment was so minor in extent.
Decision 10601
Full Text of Decision 10601
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Summary:
The Board addressed its mind only to whether claimant engaged in own business; it did not consider whether activities minor in extent. It therefore failed to exercise its jurisdiction and committed an error of law. [p. 8]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
minor in extent |
|
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
oral evidence |
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
evidence new |
|
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
natural justice and error in law or in fact |
|
Decision A-0270.96
Full Text of Decision A-0270.96
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
Umpire ruled that it was up to the Board of Referees to consider the ultimate question, which concerned not only which of the two versions had to be preferred, but whether, even if the employer’s version were set aside, the testimony of the claimant could be relied upon, given his previous statements. The BOR had a duty to weigh the testimony and previous statements with care, but preferred to accept the claimant’s testimony and ignored the contradictions on the record. The FCA agreed with the Umpire’s decision to set aside the decision of the BOR.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
credibility |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
weight of statements |
|
Decision 25933
Full Text of Decision 25933
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0696.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Decision A-0696.94
Full Text of Decision A-0696.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Board having failed to deal with the issue of penalty, the umpire allowed the appeal concerning the false statements and eliminated the penalty. The Federal Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the umpire so that he may refer the case to the Board to decide on the issue which was not dealt with.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Decision 18145
Full Text of Decision 18145
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Board effectively failed to deal with the evidence presented by the claimant as to the information she had previously received from the CEIC. Absent any finding by the Board as to the claimant's credibility, its failure to consider that evidence constitutes an error of law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
rationale |
|
|
| antedate |
misinformation from Commission |
|
|
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
as a requirement |
|
Decision 18058
Full Text of Decision 18058
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
Both decisions make no assessment of whether claimant's decision to elect voluntary lay-off was made with "just cause". They merely find that he voluntary left his employment. This is an error of law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
voluntary layoff |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
commuting |
distance too great |
|
Decision 16648A
Full Text of Decision 16648A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Board erred in law or declined to exercise its jurisdiction by refusing to calculate insurable earnings and resulting rate of benefit. To this end, the Board may refer questions to the Commission for investigation and report pursuant to reg. 65.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
independent decision-making |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
statement of facts required |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
issue not recognized |
|
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
as a requirement |
|
Decision 15896
Full Text of Decision 15896
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
After having reached the conclusion that this constitues voluntary termination, the Council had to examine the reasons why the insured took this course of action. Failure to do so constitues an error in law. The Board must examine this aspect and reach a decision.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
ultimatum |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
questions to examine |
|
Decision A-0715.87
Full Text of Decision A-0715.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Umpire noted that the Board had totally ignored the issue raised by ss. 43(2). He set aside the Board's decision, making no direction or other finding. This failure amounted to a refusal of jurisdiction.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Decision 14001
Full Text of Decision 14001
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0715.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| federal court |
jurisdiction |
|
|
| umpires |
jurisdiction |
not exercised |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
principal means of livelihood |
Decision 14251A
Full Text of Decision 14251A
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Board reduced the disqualification to 3 weeks but the issues of misconduct or voluntarily leaving were not addressed at all by the Board and that constitutes an error of law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
questions to examine |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
ultimatum |
|
Decision 14630
Full Text of Decision 14630
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
Board prepared to give claimant some benefit of doubt by reducing disqualification. Error in law. It did not determine what, if any, conduct amounted to misconduct and whether job lost by reason thereof. It is only after making such determination that length may be examined.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
proof |
|
|
Decision 14308
Full Text of Decision 14308
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Summary:
The Board looked only to the voluntary leaving and failed to address the question of just cause. That failure constituted an error in law.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
questions to examine |
|
| board of referees |
natural justice |
defined |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
new employment |
not definite |
|
