| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
rationale |
|
|
Summary:
Section 37 calculation can be made at any time, and for good reason. Arbitration and court settlements and the like can come many years down the road. They do not respect limitation periods imposed by the Act. Section 37 ensures that the claimant is not to be paid twice for the same thing. UI system was never meant to provide a double indemnity.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
new facts vs reconsideration |
|
Summary:
Claimant had received $4 000.00 from the EWPP. BOR found that that monies should not be allocated as earnings because of the 36 months limit as such, as set out in s. 43(1) of the Act, had run out. Umpire stated that section 37 does not involve a decision falling within the purview of either s. 43(1) or s. 86 and concluded that an EWPP payment is propersly defined as "earnings" pursuant to the Act.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
overpayment |
claimant's liability |
|
Summary:
Under section 37, the claimant has a positive obligation to repay an overpayment in benefits. Such an overpayment results when the claimant receives a labour arbitration award, court judgment, or "for any other reason" in respect of a period for which the claimant received benefits. This subsection neither disentitles nor disqualifies a claimant from receiving benefits; it merely creates a liability for an overpayment of those benefits.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| earnings |
income |
wage protection program |
|
Summary:
Claimant had received $4 000.00 from the EWPP. BOR found that that monies should not be allocated as earnings because of the 36 months limit as such, as set out in s. 43(1) of the Act, had run out. Umpire stated that section 37 does not involve a decision falling within the purview of either s. 43(1) or s. 86 and concluded that an EWPP payment is properly defined as "earnings" pursuant to the Act.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| reconsideration of claim |
authority to review |
time limitation |
|
Summary:
Claimant had received $4 000.00 from the EWPP. BOR found that that monies should not be allocated as earnings because of the 36 months limit as such, as set out in s. 43(1) of the Act, had run out. Umpire stated that section 37 does not involve a decision falling within the purview of either s. 43(1) or s. 86 and concluded that an EWPP payment is propersly defined as "earnings" pursuant to the Act.
