| Issue: | Sub-Issue1 | Sub-Issue2 | Sub-Issue3 | | week of unemployment | minor in extent |
Summary: Those tests (6 described in CUB 5454) are much more suitable in the case of a claimant who is operating his own business than for the employee who determines his own working hours. However, three of those tests, namely the 1st, the 5th and the 6th remain useful.
For the interpretation of ss.43(2) of the Reg., CUB 5454 proposes the following 6 tests which have been accepted by this court: 1) the time element; 2) the monies invested; 3) the success or failure; 4) the continuity; 5) the nature of the employment; 6) the availability of other work. |
| Issue: | Sub-Issue1 | Sub-Issue2 | Sub-Issue3 | | week of unemployment | real estate salespersons |
Summary: To conclude, as the Board and the Umpire did, that the profession of real estate agent paid by commission should be excluded from the exception provision of ss. 43(2) of the Reg., even if such employment is minor in extent, goes against the provisions of this Regulation.
Admittedly, it is more difficult to rebut the presumption of ss. 43(1) of the Reg. in the case of a person registered and working as a real estate agent. However, the interpretation of ss. 43(2) of the Reg. could not imply that the said employment is necessarily or automatically excluded therefrom.
Those tests (6 described in CUB 5454) are much more suitable in the case of a claimant who is operating his own business than for the employee who determines his own working hours. However, three of those tests, namely the 1st, the 5th and the 6th remain useful. |
