Summary of Issue: Attendance Of Third Party

Decision A-0418.97 Full Text of Decision A-0418.97

Commission employees need not present themselves for cross-examination before a BOR where alleged admissions by claimants are found within notes prepared by the Commission. The BOR is entitled to make a specific finding that a claimant is a credible witness notwithstanding conflicting statements found within notes taken by Commission staff during an interview. In the end, it is the role of the BOR to determine what weight, if any, should be given to them.

Decision 26564 Full Text of Decision 26564

Counsel for the claimant objected to the presence of the Commission's investigator at the hearing. Held that the investigator was entitled to be present and that it is not abnormal for an officer of the Commisision to attend a hearing.

Decision 25210 Full Text of Decision 25210

At the hearing before the Board, claimant and the employer had witnesses present to support their respective versions of the events. The Board dismissed them saying it had enough evidence and did not need to hear from any witnesses other than the actual parties. This was a gross denial of natural justice.

Decision 25116 Full Text of Decision 25116

Held that neither the Board nor the Commission are obligated to notify claimant's legal counsel of the Board's decision if counsel as not supplied the Commission with the required authorization in accordance with the Privacy and Access Act.

Decision 24974 Full Text of Decision 24974

Claimant appeals on the grounds of breach of natural justice because he was unaware that his former employer would be present or that witnesses were permitted. He ought to have raised his concerns about the procedure and requested an adjournment. Failing this, I can see no breach of natural justice.

Decision 24699 Full Text of Decision 24699

Claimant left the course because he was frustrated with the way the course was being conducted. There is not any lack of natural justice, in the legal sense, in the Board not requiring one of the instructors to testify as claimant wished him to do. The Board has no autority to issue subpoenas.

Decision 11942 Full Text of Decision 11942

The employer believed that claimant divulged confidential information to competitor and dismissed her. Competitor had agreed to attend hearing but Board said it was not proper. So claimant did not have a fair hearing. New hearing ordered.

Decision 11622 Full Text of Decision 11622

A newly appointed chairperson attended the hearing as observer and did not partake in the hearing nor in the decision-making. The evidence is that that person had no influence in the Board's decision contrary to what claimant alleged.

Decision T-1689.85 Full Text of Decision T-1689.85

Case adjourned by Board. Study of brief compelling the chairman to request attendance of third party. Premature step. No obligation to request this attendance. Case to be heard. If there is a breach of the principles of natural justice, the Umpire could intervene.

Decision A-0247.80 Full Text of Decision A-0247.80

Applicants, here the CEIC, have burden of showing that board erred and, in order to discharge this burden, may require that witnesses attend if they consider it necessary.

Decision A-0613.77 Full Text of Decision A-0613.77

Board of Referees forced the claimant and his counsel to withdraw from the hearing for a CEIC employee and refused to hear the claimant’s witness. New hearing ordered to give the claimant a full opportunity to present his case and to hear all the evidence presented to the BOR.