Summary of Issue: Weigh Evidence *

Decision A0522.08 Full Text of Decision A0522.08

The FCA indicated that the BOR properly determined that it had no jurisdiction to order the Commission to write off the overpayments. It also noted that the BOR committed no legal error in declining to place the onus of proof of the overpayments on the Commission since the decision taken by the Commission creates a debt which becomes executory against the applicant as soon as he/she is notified of the amount to be repaid. As a result, if an applicant appeals a Notice of Debt, he/she bears tho onus of demonstrating the inaccuracy of the amount specified. Similar cases: A0523.08, A0526.08, A0527.08 and A0528.08.

Decision A0548.07 Full Text of Decision A0548.07

The BOR concluded that the claimant was not entitled to benefits under the EIA because he was self-employed within the meaning of section 30(1) of the EIR during the benefit period. The BOR also upheld the assessment of a penalty under section 38 of the EIA for providing false and misleading information and maintained a notice of a very serious violation under section 7.1 of the EIA. The FCA ruled that it was not open to the Umpire nor is it open to the FCA to substitute findings of fact unless the claimant could demonstrate that the BOR's findings were made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard to the material before it.