Cases Flashcards Preview

MANA 298 > Cases > Flashcards

Flashcards in Cases Deck (9):

King vs. Biochem (QC superior court) (Employment)

- King was fired for insubordination and lack of respect
- Two verbal warnings with reasonable
- Burden of proof on EER to explain. No proof of written and no serious reason.

Decision: King awarded indemnity plus interset on 12 months salary.


Dubé vs. Volcano (QC superior court) Employment

- fire with only 2 weeks severance pay
- terms indicated only 2 weeks
- Indeterminate contract: Yes
- Can they fire him: yes
- Economic reason sufficient: No
- 2 weeks reasonable: can't waive right to reasonable notice (45 days)

Volcano must pay indemnity in lieu of reasonable notice


Hassannie v Kaufel Group (QC Superior Court) Employment

- contract was being terminated following a buyout
- T&B noticed disloyalty (hassanie tried to buyout competing co) and fired him without sevrance
- T&B required to maintain yes
- Severance package, under contract yes
- Right to fire yes, EEE was placing interests above. Fiduciary duty

T&B wins, not required to pay indemnity or damages


Copyfax v. Lambert (QC Superior Court) Employment

- signed non-competition clause
- serious reason: yes
- injunction against his ability to work is denied. non-competition clause denied
- interlocutary injunction against his use of confidential information granted


A.R. Medicom vs Bergeron (QC Superior Court) (Employment)

Between Bergeron and Hubert, both have non competition clauses. Court rejects their employer’s request to enforce clause.

non-competition clause
writing: yes
time/place: yes
legitimate interest: yes
Limitations reasonable: no, world-wide and canada, unable to work anymore.

Not passed, neither bergeron or hubert are bound by the clause


Giroux vs. Malik (Contracts)

-Malik informed agents about issue with land
- giroux says he didn't know
- malik did not tell giroux directly. Relative nullity, contract called.
- Giroux gets money back, Giroux awared damages


Peter vs Fiasche (Contracts)

- long time friends
- tax evasion
- vitiated by G's error: consicous of wrongful choice, inexcusable error
- illegal contact is null
- contract never existed
- Fiasche asked to pay back the $100k deposit


Carrefour Langelier vs Cineplex Odeon, Contracts

- fearful, vitated by fear, can't be used
- specific performance: not impossible to perform, successive performance, perished and

Guzzo must operate as Cineplex Odeon


Copiescope vs TRM (Contracts)

- trm got interlocutary inunction against copescope
- adhesion, excessive non-comp clause
- copiescope can sell again