Decision 70449
Full Text of Decision 70449
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
The Commission's allegation with respect to the decision of the Board of Referees is based on section 114(3) of the Act, requiring the Board of Referees to explain its findings on matters of fact material to its decision. The Board of Referees does not give any reason for reversing the Commission's decision on that issue. By failing to do so, it errs in law and warrants the intervention of the Umpire to allow the Commission's appeal and that issue is referred to a differently constituted Board of Referees for a new decision.
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 |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
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 |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Decision 25933
Full Text of Decision 25933
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0696.94
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
Decision 26306
Full Text of Decision 26306
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
Held that the maxim "no one is to be twice tried for one fault" does not apply if the Board of Referees neglects to dispose of an issue which is before them to decide and which they are empowered to dispose. It had the jurisdiction to re-open its hearing to deal with the issue. SEVERUD quoted.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Decision 21553
Full Text of Decision 21553
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
The Board's decision is wholly inadequate. The Board declined to decide the issue, stating it had no ability to determine whether report cards and warrants were forged and therefore upholding the Commission's decision.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
penalties |
cards signed by third party |
|
|
Decision 21559
Full Text of Decision 21559
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
The Board dismissed the appeal since neither claimant nor the employer being present, it was unable to establish his or their credibility. The Board should have proceeded according to its perception of the weight to be attached to the conflicting documentation. Error in law.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
errors in law |
burden of proof |
|
Decision 18045
Full Text of Decision 18045
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0463.90
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
decision of board |
implementation |
|
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision ambiguous |
|
Decision A-0463.90
Full Text of Decision A-0463.90
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
The Board failed in a first decision to dispose of one of the issues before it. The statute does not specify any remedies which the Board is empowered to apply. It simply allowed the appeal without saying which of the decisions was bad. It should be allowed to complete its task.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
decision of board |
implementation |
|
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision ambiguous |
|
Decision 16648A
Full Text of Decision 16648A
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
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 |
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 |
errors in law |
decision incomplete |
various |
board of referees |
statement of facts |
as a requirement |
|
Decision A-0359.85
Full Text of Decision A-0359.85
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
As the Board's decision does not show clearly whether it considered the question of claimant's availability, the matter should be referred back to it in order that the question be clearly considered and decided.
Decision 12106
Full Text of Decision 12106
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0359.85