This legal matter involves a dispute between Lisa Harvey, an employee, and her employer, Gibraltar Mines Ltd. Both Ms. Harvey and her husband were affiliated with the union and employed by Gibraltar Mines. Ms. Harvey proposed adjustments to her and her husband's work schedule due to familial obligations arising from her becoming a mother. These proposals were not considered by the employee, leading her to file a discrimination complaint based on family, marital, and gender status. Gibraltar Mines attempted to dismiss the complaint with the reason that there was lack of reasonable grounds, but the Tribunal rejected Ms. Harvey’s other complaints but considered the family status complaint. In doing so, the Tribunal referenced Health Sciences Assoc. …show more content…
Gibraltar questions the fairness of the Tribunal for starting appeal proceedings that Ms. Harvey had not requested. What questions the Tribunal’s power is that they have the authority to appeal a judge's decision and the scope of submissions it can end up to if it does have that right. Northwestern Utilities Ltd. v. Edmonton established the principle that administrative tribunals, despite being able to participate, their decisions should be based on arguments and evidence according to the respective jurisdiction, refraining from directly interfering with the other parties' interests on the critical issues. On the other hand, Ontario (Children’s Lawyer) v. Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner) started a change from the traditional rule-and-exception approach, emphasizing the importance of tribunal neutrality and the decision-making must be careful and backed up by information, while granting the court the permission to determine whether a tribunal can defend its decision issues and the extent of having such …show more content…
What distinguishes the Campbell River case is the presence of a child with a severe psychiatric disorder requiring the employee (who was the parent) immediate attention. Unlike in Campbell River, where the complainant's work schedule was changed by the employer, the issue of whether changes to an employee's work conditions could initiate discrimination based on the employee's family status is prominently visible in Ms. Harvey's case. Prima facie discrimination does not necessarily require changes in the employment conditions, but it is stated that they must not (s. 13(1)(b) “discriminate against a person regarding employment or any term or condition of employment” because of their family status. The principles governing statutory interpretation require that the language of the Code should be interpreted in a manner that aligns with the Code's objectives and the Legislature's
A well-nourished, well-developed Hispanic female named Anna Garcia standing at 65 inches, 165 pounds and in her late thirties was found dead in her house after her concerned neighbor Doug Greene was suspicions as to why she didn't take her dog out like she did normally, and why the dog was barking constantly for two hours. The police received a call from Greene on August 31st at 9:45 am and arrived at the crime scene at 9:56am.The police found Anna lying face down in the hallway. Authorities observed a pool of blood around her head and some vomit beside her. It was 73 degrees inside Anna’s house, while it was 92 degrees outside. Anna was last seen alive by her former husband, Alex Garcia the night before her death. Investigators measured her rectal temperature, and came to a conclusion that she died at 7:00 am in that same morning. A medical examiner was also called to perform an autopsy to see what really caused Anna's death.
When conducting research for my project, I came across a website that contained a few primary sources regarding the Salem Witch Trials. One of these primary sources was the photo of a legal document explaining the death warrant and reasons for execution of a woman named Bridget Bishop. Bishop was claimed to be a witch in Salem during the year 1692, and the document explaining her significance involving witchcraft resides in the Peabody Essex Museum in Salem, Massachusetts. My thesis for this primary source is that the judge and jury believed they were seeking justice by executing Bishop, a woman whose death was truthfully based on her differences as a person rather than actual crimes she committed.
The defendant of the Casey Anthony Trial, is Casey Anthony. At the age of 19 she had given birth to her daughter Caylee Marie Anthony, the victim in this case. The one who first noticed the 2 year old daughter missing were her grandparents, Cindy and George Anthony. Casey was found a month after she left her parents house, with her boyfriend Tony Lazzaro. It was then that Casey had told the police about how her daughter was missing for about a month because the babysitter, Zenaida “Zanny the Nanny” Fernandez-Gonzalez had kidnapped her. These were the main people who started off the investigation on Casey Anthony.
Carla Washburn, an incredible, inspirational woman that has sadly witnessed the 3 closest male figures in her life all pass on. This has resulted in Carla becoming depressed over the unbearable experience. Carla embraced in giving back to the community and that’s not surprising because she’s a person of spirituality. While, Carla is the client and is suffering through grief, it’s likely she’d benefit immensely from creating a program to work with the kids in the community and may give her a sense of worth she’s been seeking since these 3 tragedies.
In the case of a reasonable person test, “a reasonable person in [the employee 's] position would have felt that he was forced to quit because of intolerable and discriminatory working conditions.” The evidence was inconclusive due to Thomas’ “subjective personal discomfort, however, was most likely not the product of any action by appellees but, rather, the product of human nature.” Thomas v. Douglas
In July of 2008, one of the biggest crime cases devastated the United States nation-wide. The death of Caylee Anthony, a two year old baby, became the most popular topic in a brief amount of time. Caylee’s mother, Casey Anthony, became the main suspect after the child supposedly was kidnapped and went missing. To this day, the Casey Anthony case shocks me because justice, in my opinion, wasn’t served. I feel as if the criminal conviction system became somewhat corrupted in this case. The entire nation, including the court system, knew that Casey Anthony was behind this criminal act, but yet she escaped all charges. I chose this case not only because it’s debatable, but also to help state the obvious, this case was handled the wrong way. Clearly the legal system was biased, which worked in Casey Anthony’s favor, freeing a murderer.
The Casey Anthony case was one that captured the heart of thousands and made it to the headline of national TV talk shows, newspapers, radio stations and social media networks for months. The root of the case was due to a clash between the parental responsibilities, the expectations that went with being a parent, and the life that Casey Anthony wanted to have. The case was in respect to the discovering the cause of Casey’s two-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie Anthony’s, death; however the emphasis was placed on Casey and her futile lies, which resulted in a public outcry. The purpose of this essay is to delve into the public atmosphere and inquire about why the media and social media collectively attacked the case by uncovering the content of the case, the charges that were laid, and later dismissed, the “performers” of the trial and the publics reaction. It will further discuss how it defies universal ideologies and how the media represents this. The discussion of the complexities of the case and its connotations will incorporate Stuart Hall’s Representation and the Media, Robert Hariman’s Performing the Laws, What is Ideology by Terry Eagleton, The Body of the Condemned by Michael Foucault, and a number of news articles, which will reveal disparate ideas of representation in the media, and the role of the performers of the law and their effect on the understanding of the case.
On October 19, 1927, a “feebleminded,” young woman was robbed. This young woman’s name is Carrie Buck and her ability to conceive children was taken from her without her consent or knowledge. This decision would not only impact those already affected by unauthorized sterilization, but for those whom would later be sterilized. The Supreme Court’s ruled the sterilization of Carrie Buck to be constitutional on the grounds of it being better for society, better for the individual, and eugenic evidence.
this case is in regards to Amy Rowley, a deaf student that had excellent lip reading skills. She is under the IDEA Act and was provided resources in kindergarten that her parents wanted to follow her to the first grade. However, the school noted that Amy was an exceptionally bright student that with the use of some other aids would successfully complete the 1st grade. During the IEP meeting the school recommended that Amy
The responsibilities, the cries, the noise, disappointments and embarrassment were just the beginning the beginning of Casey Anthony madness to her crime. This particular day was June 9, 2008 the family and Casey world will be turned upside down. Casey was paranoid, nervous and panicked, so she packed up Caylee and headed to the dark, wet and scary woods where she thought her actions would be able to give her a normal lifestyle, a lifestyle she wanted before she found out she was pregnant with Caylee. Casey took Caylee her 2 year old daughter at the time to the woods and ducted tape her mouth also her nose and covered her with the cold dirt, covered her and left her for dead. A 2 year old confused, scared and afraid that her horrible mother who she thought loved her would leave her
Disparate Impact arises when an employer's practices unintentionally excludes a protected class disproportionately (Player, Shoben and Lieberwitz, 1995). A "protected class" is a group of people, with common characteristics, which Congress has determined must be protected from inequality ("On-the-Job Discrimination: Gender Discrimination," 2004). This paper will analyze the landmark disparate impact case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (401 U.S. 424, 1971) from its beginning to its conclusion in the Supreme Court. Included will be the facts of the case and the issues detailed, as well as the history of the case from initial filing to final ruling.
As German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche quoted “It is impossible to suffer without making someone pay for it; every complaint already contains revenge.” The defendant Mary Barnett has been charged with the crime of second degree murder of the death of her six-month-old baby. In some sense, a mother who killed her own child ,out of personal relationships, is obviously guilty. However, based on current evidence, the verdict could be arguable. Barnett qualified some criteria of a second degree murderer such as intentionally leaving Alison alone to die in their apartment. Due to her mental state, Barnett was not aware she was leaving her children instead thought the child will taken care of whey she was at California. It comes to the reason that Mary
Nearly half of murder cases go unsolved in the United States. According to FBI statistics, only 51% of homicides were solved in the year 2021. One of the most infamous unsolved murder cases, The Black Dahlia, is the story of a young woman sliced clean in half at the waist with not a drop of blood, indicating that she was mutilated somewhere else (FBI). Found by a mother and toddler on their morning walk around 10 am on January 15, 1947, the police were called and Los Angeles’ biggest manhunt in history kicks off. The investigation was led by the LAPD with the help of the FBI who quickly identified the body, “56 minutes, in fact, after getting blurred fingerprints via ‘Soundphoto’ from Los Angeles.”
The distinction between an unfair prejudice petition and a statutory derivative action has always been in the nature of remedy sought by the claimant. This is arguably the point where a distinction is drawn as to whether a statutory derivative action or an unfair prejudice petition should be pursued. A d...
An arbitrator’s function is usually to interpret the collective bargaining agreement between the parties, not to apply his or her standards of what is right in a given situation. The courts have sought to compel labour and management to a peaceful resolution of grievances through arbitration. The Supreme Court has given support to the arbitration process in a series of decisions, and judicial deferral to arbitration has become a basic tenet of national labour policy. Bibliography Byars, L. L. (1997). The.