FRANÇAIS

Claimant: Bernard LACHANCE 

Appellant: Claimant 

The claimant is appealing the unanimous decision of a Board of Referees ratifying that of the Commission to the effect that the claimant was not unemployed in the meaning of Sections 19 and 21 of the Act, since he had been operating an automobile window repair business by the name of Vitres d 'auto St-Léonard Enrg. since August 1, 1982. 

The claimant does not deny that he did in fact open this business; it is still in operation today. He stresses the fact that he was not interested in living off U.I. benefits, and that he much preferred working. Since he could not find a job, he went into business for himself and is proud of it. 

His attitude is certainly commendable. There is of course no question of attacking the initiative of a hand working man by depriving him of the benefits to which he is entitled. None the less, it must be recognized that the purpose of benefit is not to finance a small business, but to assist those who are looking for work and cannot find it. 

What is really at issue here is the precise date at which the claimant ceased being unemployed and became an entrepreneur. The record contains several noteworthy dates. First of all, the rental contract for the shop in which the business was to operate was signed on August 10, 1982. The lease came into effect on September 1, 1982. Next, the registration of the company name "Vitres d'autos St-Léonard Enrg. is dated August 11, 1982. A permit from the town of St-Léonard authorizes the claimant to operate his business from September 1, 1982 to December 31, 1982. Lastly, the first receipt, the first contract carried out for the first customer, is dated September 7, 1982. 

The Board concluded that 'even though the claimant filed a receipt dated September 7, 1982, it is clear that, from the beginning of August, all his efforts were oriented towards his business". 

We are dealing with a pure appreciation of fact. Under such circumstances, the Umpire may not substitute his view for that of the Board and draw his own conclusions. Furthermore, Jurisprudence has clearly established that the days preceding the opening of a business may be considered a period in which the claimant is devoting enough time to his project that he cannot be regarded as unemployed. 

The claimant's appeal is therefore dismissed. 

UMPIRE

Dated April 3, 1985