| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
principal means of livelihood |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant worked many hours each week in order to build up his business, while he was claiming benefits. Umpire found that the claimant could not argue that he was not relying on his business as a principal means of livelihood, nor that he should not be deemed to have always worked full working weeks. FCA upheld the Umpire’s decision.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
full working week |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant worked many hours each week in order to build up his business, while he was claiming benefits. Umpire found that the claimant could not argue that he was not relying on his business as a principal means of livelihood, nor that he should not be deemed to have always worked full working weeks. FCA upheld the Umpire’s decision.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| week of unemployment |
business |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant worked many hours each week in order to build up his business, while he was claiming benefits. Umpire found that the claimant could not argue that he was not relying on his business as a principal means of livelihood, nor that he should not be deemed to have always worked full working weeks. FCA upheld the Umpire’s decision.
