Boucher Case Assignment_Tanvi Dharmendra Rajadhyaksha

Dismissal Without Cause (Ch. 15) The Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Case Assignment – 2% Student Name: Tanvi Dharmendra Rajadhyaksha – N01611461 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) Boucher, an assistant manager at Walmart, claimed she was mistreated by her manager, Pinnock, over six months. She alleged Constructive Dismissal, indicating that her working conditions became intolerable, effectively ending her employment. The jury found in favor of Boucher, determining that she was a victim of Constructive Dismissal. The jury awarded damages, including both aggravated and punitive damages, reflecting the severity of the mistreatment. The jury found in favor of Boucher, determining that she was a victim of Constructive Dismissal. The jury awarded damages, including both aggravated and punitive damages, reflecting the severity of the mistreatment. 2. Why did Boucher only get 20 weeks’ salary for her “reasonable notice/pay in lieu” damages for her constructive dismissal from Wal-Mart? Evidence showed that Boucher had recovered from the effects of the wrongdoer’s action, and she was able to work. Thus, Boucher was only entitled to the loss of income provided for in her employment contract, which was 20 weeks. 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 $200000 $200000 $100000 $100000 $ 0 $ 0 Pinnock $ 0 $ 0 $150000 $150000 $100000 $100000 4. What are the three elements required to prove the tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering ? (summarize)  The defendant behaved very badly.  The defendant intended to harm the plaintiff.  The defendant's actions made the plaintiff visibly and provably sick. 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. I agree with the Court of Appeal's decision to change the punitive damages from $150,000 to $100,000. The court kept the aggravated damages at $100,000 because Walmart didn't take Boucher's complaints seriously, didn't stop Pinnock's mistreatment, didn't follow its own rules, and even threatened Boucher for speaking up. Against Pinnock: YES/ NO (highlight your choice) Explain your answer. Yes, the court decided that Walmart deserved to pay punitive damages because of its bad behavior. However, they thought the amount should be less because the already high aggravated damages served as a form of punishment and condemnation. 6. Any other comments?  Make fair rules at work that say no to harassment, and make sure everyone follows them.  Look into problems at work quickly, completely, and without picking sides.