Boucher Case Assignment W23 (1)

.docx

School

Humber College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

5007

Subject

Law

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by KidMusic13077

Dismissal Without Cause (Ch. 15) The Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Case Assignment – 1% Student Name: Bharti Kataria ASSIGNMENT: Carefully review the Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp . 2014 ONCA 419 Case-in-Point entitled “Major Damages Awarded against Wal-Mart and its Manager” found on pages 569 – 571 of the textbook Based on that information, answer the questions below Submit your completed assignment through the drop box by the due date (See Critical Path) 1. Briefly set out the key facts (not the decision) of the case (2 – 3 sentences) Miss Boucher was an assistant manager at Walmart, Ontario. Miss Boucher was treated badly by her manager Mr. Pinnock when she refused to falsify a temperature log and after this, Mr. Pinnock started humiliating and belittling Miss Boucher in front of other co-workers. Miss Boucher resigned and sued Walmart for constructive dismissal and related damages. 2. Why did Boucher only get 20 weeks’ salary for her “reasonable notice/pay in lieu” damages for her constructive dismissal from Wal-Mart? Miss Boucher received only 20 weeks salary for her “reasonable notice/pay in lieu” damages because the employment contract stated only “20 weeks” of pay. She must have worked for 10years with Walmart (2 weeks' pay for everyone year) 3. Complete the following chart by inserting the awards given by the trial judge and then the Ontario Court of Appeal (ON CA) for the additional headings of damages. Purpose of this assignment: To develop a deeper understanding of the different types of damages that may be awarded in a wrongful dismissal (or, as in this case, constructive dismissal) case where an employer’s behavior has been very poor. To explore the types of employer (and manager) misconduct that can attract awards for aggravated (moral) damages and punitive damages in wrongful dismissal situations. To identify the necessary elements to prove the tort of “intentional infliction of mental suffering”
DEFENDANT Trial Judge award for Aggravated Damages ON CA award for Aggravated Damages Trial judge award for punitive damages ON CA award for punitive damages Trial judge award for intentional infliction of mental suffering ON CA award for intentional infliction of mention suffering Walmart $200,00 $200,00 $ 1 million $100,00 $ 0 $ 0 Pinnock $ 0 $ 0 $ 150,000 $10,000 $100,000 $100,000 4. What are the three elements required to prove the tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering ? (summarize) 1)The defendant's conduct was flagrant and outrageous. 2) The defendant's conduct was calculated to harm the plaintiff. 3)The defendant's conduct caused the plaintiff to suffer a visible and provable illness. 5. Do you agree with the Ontario Court of Appeal’s changes to the trial judge’s damages awards? Against Walmart: YES/ NO (highlight your choice) Explain your answer. The Ontario Court of Appeal's modifications to Pinnock's damages judgments, in my opinion, were inappropriate because he was the main offender in the case and had committed several mistakes over the course of the proceedings. The most significant examples of multiple misconducts range from encouraging the employee under him to engage in the improper act of falsifying temperatures, to publicly touching and embarrassing her when she spoke up for herself, and finally, pushing someone to the point where they are unable to bear the situation any longer and give up on her job status. Neither his innocence nor his intentions could be justified in any one instance. Thus, I believe that the Trial Judge's damage awards were reasonable and do not require modification. Against Pinnock: YES/ NO (highlight your choice) Explain your answer. Yes, I feel the Court of Appeal decision in changes to damage awards is correct. The court found out that Mr. Pinnock treatment of Boucher met the high standard for such damages; however, it reduced the amount of the punitive award from $150,000 to $10,000 on the basis that the high
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help