Decision 26895
Full Text of Decision 26895
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Board's task was to weigh the evidence and they chose to accept that of the claimant in preference to that of her employer. In doing so, it carried out the duty which was incumbent upon it to perform. It was neither a capricious nor perverse finding in light of the evidence they had heard.
Decision 26859
Full Text of Decision 26859
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Board placed undue reliance on claimant's friend when it concluded that claimant was willing to abandon the course. It cost $3,500 for each of 3 sessions; in the absence of evidence about a refund policy, it was perverse for the Board to accept this based only on the credibility of claimant's friend.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
courses |
factors to consider |
|
| availability for work |
courses |
substantial fees paid |
|
Decision 23503
Full Text of Decision 23503
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0728.93
Decision A-0728.93
Full Text of Decision A-0728.93
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
We agree firstly that the Board of Referees based its decision on irrelevant considerations and secondly, that the claimant has not proven that she was unemployed; the Umpire committed no error which would permit us to intervene.
Decision A-0640.93
Full Text of Decision A-0640.93
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Umpire substituted the Board's view of the facts for his own without asking himself whether there was evidence in the record before the Board to support its conclusion and without first finding that the Board had erred in principle in reaching its conclusion. See McCARTHY.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
working conditions |
dangerous |
|
Decision 23101
Full Text of Decision 23101
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0640.93
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
working conditions |
dangerous |
|
Decision 24013
Full Text of Decision 24013
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0115.94
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
no reasonable alternative |
|
Decision A-0115.94
Full Text of Decision A-0115.94
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
It is evident from the Board's decision that both the majority and minority view had been canvassed. Although the majority could have ruled otherwise, they chose to disbelieve claimant as to the cause for leaving his employment. The Umpire could not substitute the opinion of the majority for hers.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
just cause |
no reasonable alternative |
|
Decision 25193
Full Text of Decision 25193
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Board's decision was made in a perverse and capricious manner and without regard to the material before it. It failed to indicate why it did not accept what the doctor stated as to the period of claimant's incapacity, and nor did it speak of the claimant's admission that he is incapable of working.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
without regard for material |
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
definition |
|
| availability for work |
applicability |
definition |
incapacity |
Decision 23769
Full Text of Decision 23769
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
There is no evidence in the record to support the Board's finding that the vacation monies were held in trust by the employer for the claimant. Absent such evidence, I find that the Board based its decision on a capricious finding of fact. That being the case, the decision of the Board cannot stand.
Decision 21933
Full Text of Decision 21933
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Finding the claimant unavailable for the whole period is not supported by the evidence and is flatly contradicted by one exhibit. A finding that she was unavailable during the whole period is perverse in the face of her application to a specific employer for full-time work.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
applicability |
definition |
|
Decision 19780
Full Text of Decision 19780
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Electrician sharing his job, 9 weeks at work and 9 weeks off. Claimant has stated that he did not carry out a job search. In light of this, the Board's implicit finding that he had proved his availability is capricious and should be overturned. [p._11]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
compensatory leave |
|
|
| availability for work |
incompatible situations |
sharing employment |
|
| teaching |
availability for work |
summer months |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of provision |
|
Decision 17461
Full Text of Decision 17461
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
A waitress was asked to dress less decently. In the view of the Board, she was justified in leaving under the Charter. An absurd finding since she continued to work 8 hours a week at the same location.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
ethical considerations |
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
reduction in hours |
|
Decision 17352
Full Text of Decision 17352
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Board found that job opportunities were unduly limited and that the wage rate requested was not realistic. However, there is nothing in the file to support such a finding of the facts, which therefore seems to me arbitrary.
Decision S-0512.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The tentative agreement was never ratified; it was followed by a lockout until a new agreement with different terms was ratified. It is patently absurd to say, as the Board did, that the tentative agreement brought to an end the labour dispute. Leave to appeal dismissed by SC.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision 14671
Full Text of Decision 14671
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0148.88
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
wages or salary |
designated holidays |
|
Decision A-0148.88
Full Text of Decision A-0148.88
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Umpire was justified in intervening since the Board's decision was clearly based on a perverse finding of fact, namely that the parties had postponed the observance of a plant holiday to a day the plant was closed and which was, moreover, a Sunday.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
wages or salary |
designated holidays |
|
Decision A-0770.87
Full Text of Decision A-0770.87
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Umpire decided that the Board's finding was capricious and perverse. Since there was clearly evidence supporting the conclusion of the Board, the Umpire could not, under 80(c), substitute his judgment of the facts anymore than this Court under 28(1)(c).
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
Decision 14045
Full Text of Decision 14045
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0770.87
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
rules of construction |
effective date of proviso |
|
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
Decision 12814
Full Text of Decision 12814
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
It is not enough that the Board may have based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact. It can do that, according to the law, with impunity. To be set aside, the finding must be one made in a perverse or capricious manner.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
courses of study |
|
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
applicability |
duration of disqualification |
|
Decision A-0770.85
Full Text of Decision A-0770.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
A misinterpretation of the facts by a Board does not necessarily establish a ground of appeal. An erroneous finding of fact is sufficient only if made in a perverse or capricious manner, said the Umpire [p.7]. There is no basis on which this Court couldproperly intervene with the Umpire's decision.
Decision A-0825.85
Full Text of Decision A-0825.85
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Determining the termination date of a course is a question of fact. Under 80(c), the Umpire could only review such a finding of fact if it was erroneous, perverse or capricious. Nothing in the record shows that this condition had been met.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Decision 11324
Full Text of Decision 11324
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0825.85
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| courses of instruction or training |
referral |
duration |
|
Decision 11836
Full Text of Decision 11836
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Refer to: A-0186.86
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
conditions required |
7 days without earnings |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision A-0186.86
Full Text of Decision A-0186.86
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
An Umpire may not review a finding of fact by a Board unless that finding was erroneous and made in a perverse or capricious manner. Clearly, even if the findings of fact may be questioned, it cannot be said that they are erroneous, not to mention perverse or capricious.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| interruption of earnings |
conditions required |
7 days without earnings |
|
| board of referees |
errors in law |
misinterpretation of facts |
|
Decision A-1203.84
Full Text of Decision A-1203.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Record contained evidence on which board could reasonably have made these findings of fact; whether or not they were theoretically sound, the possibility that they could have been given a different reading would not allow Umpire to substitute his opinion for the board's.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
nature of monies |
|
| earnings |
severance pay |
definition |
|
Decision A-0595.84
Full Text of Decision A-0595.84
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Not allowed to reverse a finding of fact even if against the weight of evidence. The proper test is whether there was any evidence upon which the Board could have found as it did or whether it made any mistake of principle. [p. 5-6]
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
not a trial de novo |
|
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
natural justice and error in law or in fact |
|
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
not to be read strictly |
|
| board of referees |
statement of facts |
as a requirement |
|
Decision A-0020.82
Full Text of Decision A-0020.82
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
The Umpire would have reversed the Board's decision merely because other decisions of Boards were not appealed by the CEIC. They were made by Boards differently constituted on the particular facts before them. No support for a conclusion that the decision was made capriciously.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
claimants treated differently |
|
|
| voluntarily leaving employment |
personal reasons |
retirement |
|
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
req'd |
Decision A-0258.81
Full Text of Decision A-0258.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
It is the finding of fact of the Board that is put into question. Such an attack is not admissible if based on mere suppositions, conjectures or possibilities and not on any clear evidence [p.7] as per Umpire. S.28 application dismissed for the reasons given by the Umpire.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| basic concepts |
rate of unemployment |
|
|
Decision A-0452.81
Full Text of Decision A-0452.81
summary
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| umpires |
grounds of appeal |
capricious finding |
meaning |
Summary:
Since the insured brought action against the employer for injury to reputation and received $2,000 for withdrawing the grievance, and not as salary, that sum is not equivalent to earnings, according to the Umpire. Capricious finding that may not reasonably be made from the record, according to the Court.
other summary
| Other Issue(s): |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
awards |
as income |
|
