The Bilbo Baggins Case
Identify the relevant parties or players in the fact scenario:
Bilbo Baggins is the plaintiff in this situation if he does sue for wrongful dismissal. The accusations around him provide facts to his situation.
Orc Industries Corp would be classified as the defendants, as they’re the ones sued or charged with a crime. In this case, it’s in regards to wrongful dismissal charges. Which may only be relevant if Bilbo Baggins chooses to sue them for it.
The two main players are mostly representative of if Bilbo Baggins chooses to sue for wrongful dismissal, if he were to simply leave the company without such notice, Bilbo would be someone let go from his company do to accusations, and the company would be the fiery.
Identify the relevant …show more content…
legal areas, principles and concepts that apply to the fact scenario.
Wrongful dismissal or Unjust dismissal, is the idea that an “employee has been dismissed for cause and the employee claims there was no cause, or when an employee is given notice of dismissal and the employee claims the notice was inadequate”(Duplessis 551).
In such a case, Bilbo Baggins can indeed file for wrongful dismissal as his scenario presents both problems.
Another relevant principle and concept is Employment Standards legislation, which states the benefits an Employee has at a working company while also defining his rights while working there.
For instance, in terms of termination: “the employer must provide the employee with either written notice of termination, termination pay or a combination (as long as the notice and the number of weeks of termination pay together equal the length of notice the employee is entitled to receive)”(Ontario Ministry of Labour 1).
Also, Wrongful Dismissal charges play a role here. If Bilbo files for wrongful dismissal, he may claim funds relevant to his salary prior to being fired.
Explain why and how the relevant legal areas, principles and concepts apply to the fact …show more content…
scenario:
In regards to wrongful dismissal, Bilbo can file for it because there was a limited amount of causes to justify that Bilbo came to work drunk everyday.
The one bottle of whiskey found in his office, may or may not be representative of Bilbo’s drinking habits during work or off it. However, it’s simply not a big enough claim from the employer to assume Bilbo came to work drunk every morning. If a continuous problem was identified by the employer over a period of time, instead of just one bottle which was found, the employers would have better arguments to specify their case of the story.
Furthermore, in regards to Employment standards legislation and wrongful dismissal, Bilbo was not given enough notice prior to being fired. With more than 3 months of working at Orc corporations, Bilbo was fired on the spot in May 2007 for a bottle of whiskey which was found in his desk. This certainly wasn’t reasonable notice as the ESA states that employees are required at least 1 week notice, when having worked at a company for less than a year (Pereira 1).
Both the ESA’s and Wrongful dismissal ideas present relevant concepts that apply to Bilbo’s scenario, as Bilbo wasn’t given enough notice while also being accused of being drunk do to the one object which was found in his office.
On the other hand, Wrongful dismissal Damages can aid Bilbo in earning money due to false claims from his former
employers.
Likely outcome of this scenario given that both parties go to court:
Given that Bilbo is filing for wrongful dismissal, and the only claim of the defendant (His former employers) is that they found a bottle near his desk, doesn’t provide enough evidence for him coming to work drunk or being dishonest. Thus, a likely outcome of such a scenario would be the plaintiff (Bilbo) winning his case against the defendants. Once the court claims how many months the plaintiff is entitled to i.e wrongful dismissal Damages, Bilbo would get something in return in terms of a salary multiplied by monthly benefits the plaintiff was entitled to. Given that the wrongful dismissal is indeed the correct outcome.
Bilbo Baggins is the plaintiff in this situation if he does sue for wrongful dismissal. The accusations around him provide facts to his situation.
Orc Industries Corp would be classified as the defendants, as they’re the ones sued or charged with a crime. In this case, it’s in regards to wrongful dismissal charges. Which may only be relevant if Bilbo Baggins chooses to sue them for it.
The two main players are mostly representative of if Bilbo Baggins chooses to sue for wrongful dismissal, if he were to simply leave the company without such notice, Bilbo would be someone let go from his company do to accusations, and the company would be the fiery.
Identify the relevant …show more content…
legal areas, principles and concepts that apply to the fact scenario.
Wrongful dismissal or Unjust dismissal, is the idea that an “employee has been dismissed for cause and the employee claims there was no cause, or when an employee is given notice of dismissal and the employee claims the notice was inadequate”(Duplessis 551).
In such a case, Bilbo Baggins can indeed file for wrongful dismissal as his scenario presents both problems.
Another relevant principle and concept is Employment Standards legislation, which states the benefits an Employee has at a working company while also defining his rights while working there.
For instance, in terms of termination: “the employer must provide the employee with either written notice of termination, termination pay or a combination (as long as the notice and the number of weeks of termination pay together equal the length of notice the employee is entitled to receive)”(Ontario Ministry of Labour 1).
Also, Wrongful Dismissal charges play a role here. If Bilbo files for wrongful dismissal, he may claim funds relevant to his salary prior to being fired.
Explain why and how the relevant legal areas, principles and concepts apply to the fact …show more content…
scenario:
In regards to wrongful dismissal, Bilbo can file for it because there was a limited amount of causes to justify that Bilbo came to work drunk everyday.
The one bottle of whiskey found in his office, may or may not be representative of Bilbo’s drinking habits during work or off it. However, it’s simply not a big enough claim from the employer to assume Bilbo came to work drunk every morning. If a continuous problem was identified by the employer over a period of time, instead of just one bottle which was found, the employers would have better arguments to specify their case of the story.
Furthermore, in regards to Employment standards legislation and wrongful dismissal, Bilbo was not given enough notice prior to being fired. With more than 3 months of working at Orc corporations, Bilbo was fired on the spot in May 2007 for a bottle of whiskey which was found in his desk. This certainly wasn’t reasonable notice as the ESA states that employees are required at least 1 week notice, when having worked at a company for less than a year (Pereira 1).
Both the ESA’s and Wrongful dismissal ideas present relevant concepts that apply to Bilbo’s scenario, as Bilbo wasn’t given enough notice while also being accused of being drunk do to the one object which was found in his office.
On the other hand, Wrongful dismissal Damages can aid Bilbo in earning money due to false claims from his former
employers.
Likely outcome of this scenario given that both parties go to court:
Given that Bilbo is filing for wrongful dismissal, and the only claim of the defendant (His former employers) is that they found a bottle near his desk, doesn’t provide enough evidence for him coming to work drunk or being dishonest. Thus, a likely outcome of such a scenario would be the plaintiff (Bilbo) winning his case against the defendants. Once the court claims how many months the plaintiff is entitled to i.e wrongful dismissal Damages, Bilbo would get something in return in terms of a salary multiplied by monthly benefits the plaintiff was entitled to. Given that the wrongful dismissal is indeed the correct outcome.