The applicant requested a reconsideration of a Licence Appeal Tribunal decision that included income/losses from one of his properties in the calculation of his Income Replacement Benefits.
The applicant argued the adjudicator erred in law by classifying the property as employment income rather than investment income and by focusing on his level of activity.
The adjudicator dismissed the request, finding that the applicant was attempting to relitigate the original hearing and had failed to identify a significant error of fact or law.
