Decision A-0904.96

Case Number Claimant Judge Language Decision date
Decision A-0904.96 Ménard Réjean  Federal  French 1997-06-09
Decision Appealed Appellant Corresponding Case
Dismissed Unanimous  No Claimant  35351 


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  errors in law  misinterpretation of facts 

Summary:

Wife paid for work performed by the claimant. No earnings declared. Claimant admitted before the BOR that he knew the way he was completing his cards was incorrect and illegal. Nevertheless, the BOR found that the claimant had not knowingly made 14 false statements. Umpire overturned the BOR's decision, stating that it was made with total disregard for the facts. FCA ruled that the Umpire was justified in substituting her assessment of the evidence for that of the BOR, since the Board had dismissed a statement by the claimant without explanation.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
board of referees  penalties  clear and simple language 

Summary:

Wife paid for work performed by the claimant. No earnings declared. Claimant admitted before the BOR that he knew the way he was completing his cards was incorrect and illegal. Nevertheless, the BOR found that the claimant had not knowingly made 14 false statements. Umpire overturned the BOR's decision, stating that it was made with total disregard for the facts. FCA ruled that the Umpire was justified in substituting her assessment of the evidence for that of the BOR, since the Board had dismissed a statement by the claimant without explanation.


Issue: Sub-Issue 1: Sub-Issue 2: Sub-Issue 3:
earnings  income  between spouses 

Summary:

Wife paid for work performed by the claimant. No earnings declared. Claimant admitted before the BOR that he knew the way he was completing his cards was incorrect and illegal. Nevertheless, the BOR found that the claimant had not knowingly made 14 false statements. Umpire overturned the BOR's decision, stating that it was made with total disregard for the facts. FCA ruled that the Umpire was justified in substituting her assessment of the evidence for that of the BOR, since the Board had dismissed a statement by the claimant without explanation.


Date modified: