CTA Case No. 1144 (Decision)

vuLJ ~ )f' rHE. I'I1.1.L<1�"'P!N IIIft ~ Ul T OF 1',1\.X APFEA.l..l IIAND..4 I CT � 11 X- - 415

l,l- C1 �1 2 r fi r it ct r� 1 1 t 1s � 8 r1 0 � 1 or t t t 5i 0 � i i th u t 0 1r - t t 1 t t (2) t 1 1 I n l .. e0 l - 1 � l . � c ClU 1" 1 lo. � 1 t l t1 �1 416

c o. CI IO"'l .... 11 .. ...,,~ ' 3 rul � or o 11 for i;wo rea ons . t p 1 1o 1 1 t - 1 s r .sot�v ticn ht t 1 b h t th: ta. h r~ i h 11 lieu of all o h r ' un1- e p 1 , provi n"-"ial or o ti- l t ~) .ti tic 1u ct t th tr t x ot 5 provide in ctio tt EJ 11 (l 3. 1 t fer o o1 or h . 1. 1 � 41 7

� 11ft4 nd t e ion app al d t o o r� th b ffir , b co t . int p t1tion r . 0 �' .D . ' n1 t c r 1 1 1 6) . . 41 8