Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 7 May 1935

Vol. 56 No. 4

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Insurance Contributions.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware that Mr. George Browne, Main Street, Ballintra, County Donegal, was informed on November 23rd, 1934, that it had been decided his employment with Mr. Kielty, Drumsna, during certain periods between September, 1929, and March, 1934, was not regarded as employment within the meaning of the Unemployment Insurance Acts; whether he will state the grounds on which this decision is based, and if arising therefrom the contributions paid by Mr. Browne will be refunded to him.

Mr. George Browne of Main Street, Ballintra, lodged a claim to unemployment benefit on the 28th December, 1931, on which he was paid 85 days' benefit to the amount of £10 12s. 6d. in the period 4th January, 1932, to the 13th April, 1932.

On the 16th July, 1934, he lodged a fresh claim to benefit, having in the meantime been employed from the 18th April, 1932, to 14th January, 1934. In the course of inquiries made from his last employer it was disclosed that Mr. Browne had, in fact, been employed in a domestic capacity, and not in a business conducted for gain, which employment is excepted under (b) of Part 2 of the First Schedule to the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920. Accordingly, the contributions paid in respect thereof could not be accepted as giving rise to a claim to benefit. Inquiry was then made in regard to the validity of the earlier contributions on which benefit had already been paid, and it was found that those contributions had also been paid in respect of similar employment by the same employer. These contributions also have had to be treated as ineffective.

The position, therefore, is that Mr. George Browne has paid into the Unemployment Fund the sum of £6 2s. 9d. as his share of the contributions referred to, which were not properly payable, whilst he has received, by way of unemployment benefit in respect of these invalid contributions, the sum of £10 12s. 6d. He has, therefore, received in unemployment benefit, on the contributions paid in error, a greater sum than the amount which would now be refundable to him in respect of those contributions. Consequently, he is not entitled to any refund.

Barr
Roinn