Decision 38254
Full Text of Decision 38254
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
One of the functions of a Board when faced with contradictory evidence, such as here the Employer's statements vary with those of the claimant, their role and duty is to determine the credibility of the conflicting evidence, and to determine what weight to put upon it.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
proof |
weight of statements |
|
|
board of referees |
weight of statements |
credibility |
|
Decision 37863
Full Text of Decision 37863
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
A Board hearing is required to be summary in nature, and the conduct of it must not be confused with hearings in civil or criminal tribunals, Employment Standards Act or the Human Rights Commission. Evidence is not given under oath and while witnesses may be heard there is little opportunity for examination or cross-exmination.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
umpires |
grounds of appeal |
not a trial de novo |
|
Decision 26306
Full Text of Decision 26306
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Boards were established to allow for a quick and informal resolution of disputes between claimants and the Commission. This purpose would be defeated if a party was not allowed to have the referees go back and deal with an issue which they had neglected to address in the first decision.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
decision incomplete |
|
Decision 20783
Full Text of Decision 20783
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Boards sitting on appeals are required to act as independent, impartial tribunals. The proceeding is appellate in nature and must never be permitted to degenerate into something akin to an inquisitorial process. Boards are generally masters of their own procedure.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
natural justice |
free of bias |
|
Decision A-0897.90
Full Text of Decision A-0897.90
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Although a Board of Referees is not composed of ad hoc representatives of labour, management and the public but is rather drawn from a nominated panel, it is nevertheless evident that it is far from a truly "professional" tribunal.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
penalties |
proof |
|
|
board of referees |
statement of facts |
not to be read strictly |
|
Decision 18611
Full Text of Decision 18611
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Refer to: A-0897.90
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
penalties |
proof |
|
|
board of referees |
statement of facts |
not to be read strictly |
|
Decision 18130
Full Text of Decision 18130
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
The Board did not abandon its role as adjudicator in conducting what she refers to as an "adversarial cross-examination". I have read the transcript. Members were only asking questions to enable them to understand her position. This is a practice regularly indulged in by judges.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
availability for work |
job search |
warning before disentitlement |
|
Decision 17292
Full Text of Decision 17292
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Availability is a question of fact. Members of Boards are not legal experts but people drawn from the community who are expected to make a common sense judgment. When they do, their assessment of who to believe, or what is reasonable, ought not to be overturned lightly.
Decision 16824
Full Text of Decision 16824
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Claimant refers to matters that Board should have "checked". The Board does not possess investigatory power. Claimant must use best efforts to secure evidence to support his allegations. Commission's duty to fairly present evidence. Board's function to assess evidence presented.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
errors in law |
not applying jurisprudence |
|
voluntarily leaving employment |
legislation |
questions to examine |
|
Decision 16222
Full Text of Decision 16222
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Not a trial in the nature of the normal criminal or civil process of courts. The Board's task is to assess, on the basis of information available to the Commission at time of its decision and such further explanation as claimant may provide, whether thedecision should be varied.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
right to cross-examine |
|
|
board of referees |
weight of statements |
hearsay |
|
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
assess credibility |
duty |
Decision 14551
Full Text of Decision 14551
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Boards are quasi-judicial bodies who have to make administrative decisions or rulings in matters pertaining to appeals under the UI Act.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
penalties |
rationale |
|
|
Decision 14375
Full Text of Decision 14375
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Whether a claimant is available is a question of fact. Because members of Boards are not legal experts but are people drawn from the community, they are in a better position than the Umpire to make this sort of determination.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
availability for work |
job search |
warning before disentitlement |
|
reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
authority to write off |
|
Decision 13630
Full Text of Decision 13630
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
Members of Boards are not legal experts. They are members of the community who make their decisions based on experience and common sense. Context: penalty.
Decision 12953
Full Text of Decision 12953
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
The composition of Boards and nature of proceedings place them in a better position than the Umpire to decide on a question of fact. Members of Board are not legal experts, but expected to rely on own knowledge of community and common sense.
Decision 12181
Full Text of Decision 12181
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
It is clear that in meeting to hear the appeal, the Board was carrying out one of the principal duties assigned to it by the Act and therefore acting in the proper exercise of its jurisdiction.
other summary
Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
priority of law |
|
labour dispute |
stoppage of work |
strike or lockout |
|
Decision 11023
Full Text of Decision 11023
summary
Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
board of referees |
jurisdiction |
reason for existence of boards |
|
Summary:
The appeal provisions of s.80 are somewhat limited, the intention of Parliament being to make the Board the final arbiter of facts so long as the statutory provisions of the insurance scheme are respected.