| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
good cause |
special benefits |
|
Summary:
Two factors were considered by the umpire: the claims requested (at age 65) are of a type that one would not expect to find in an unemployment insurance system, and the insured had contributed to the system for 30 years. It is deemed that these two factors have nothing to do with the delay invoked.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
ignorance of the law |
good faith |
|
Summary:
It has been established in this Court that good faith and ignorance of the law do not in themselves constitute a valid reason for justification, but it has also been established that they do not exclude the existence of a valid reason if the claimant demonstrates that he acted as a reasonable person.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| antedate |
ignorance of the law |
duty to enquire |
|
Summary:
Retired at age 65. Satisfied with a rumour that he did not verify with a responsible source, and without taking any steps whatsoever, erroneously believed that he was ineligible for benefits. There is no doubt that a reasonable person would have done more.
