| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
applicability |
|
|
Summary:
She said no when specifically asked whether she had been out of Canada. There was no entrapment for the claimant as suggested by counsel since a truthful reply was expected. She chose not to do so. It is immaterial whether the Insurance Officer knew the answer before asking the question.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| availability for work |
absences from home |
out of canada |
|
Summary:
Para. 54(4)(a) quoted. It is agreed that Maple Valley is a 4 to 5-hour drive from Canada. Even granting that she was temporarily resident at her mother's residence in the state of Washington, a state contiguous to Canada, I would be stretching the legislation by saying she was available in Canada.
