Summary of Issue: From A Commission Agent

Decision 21503 Full Text of Decision 21503

The Board was mistaken in setting aside a questionnaire saying that it had not been completed by the insured herself. The information written down by a CEIC agent, within the context of an investigation concerning an application, is quite probative unless serious evidence to the contrary.

Decision A-0044.91 Full Text of Decision A-0044.91

Claimant unsuccessfully contended that evidence consisting of some exhibits being notes of a CEIC employee of inquiries made by that employee, the main part being notes of an interview with claimant herself, was inadmissible pursuant to ss. 30(10) of the Canada Evidence Act. No substantive rule of evidence or of natural justice is involved here but merely a question of how a particular piece of evidence shall be received. This is a matter of procedure within the meaning of that word in ss. 64(6) to be determined by the chairperson of the Board.

Decision 15000B Full Text of Decision 15000B

Refer to: A-0044.91

Decision 16621 Full Text of Decision 16621

The attorney for the insured called into question the content of the statement because it was not signed by his client and constituted hearsay. Argument rejected; the insured is identified by his driver's license, a document that is acceptable according to MILLS.

Decision 13091 Full Text of Decision 13091

The claimant signed each page of the report of the interview; she obviously read the report and agreed with it; if there were any statements in the report that were wrong, it was for her to have changed them before she signed.

Decision 12754 Full Text of Decision 12754

Reports of interviews with claimants which are recorded in a cryptic and selective manner are not very convincing evidence.

Decision 11756 Full Text of Decision 11756

The report bears the signature of the claimant along side that of the interviewer and confirms that he "read and received copy of it and agrees with the content". It must therefore be generally taken to accurately reflect his statements made at the time.

Decision 11233 Full Text of Decision 11233

Although there is substance to the doctrine that a claimant's early statements should be given full weight, it does not always and necessarily follow that the message taken by a Commission staff is the message that was intended by the claimant.