Description

Anna Nicole was hired at the University Hospital (UH), as a radiology technician after the administration heard of her great work at Montreal Cardiology Hospital (MCH) for more than 20 years. At 50 years of age, Anna Nicole was reluctant to leave her job at MCH, where she had great benefits, however the UH offer to be the best paid radiology technician in Montreal and the first to operate a new, highly advanced MRI machine, was too good to refuse. Anna Nicole began her new job March 1st 2014. Her contract states that if she is terminated for whatever reason she will not be allowed to accept employment as a radiology technician anywhere in Montreal for a period of one year.

 Last month, after only one year, her supervisor terminates her employment and pays her the 2 weeks notice required under the Labour Standards Act. Her employer gives no specific reasons for her dismissal telling her that no reason is required because she has less than 2 years service. Anna Nicole asks for your legal advice concerning her rights regarding her dismissal and her right to notice of termination, as well as the validity of her non-competition clause. Guidelines for answering Law Development question: For the development questions, it can help to make a quick outline of the answer you want to develop, which will help you organize your knowledge into a clear and concisely developed answer. You can use point form to answer, as long as the points clearly express the ideas necessary to answer the question. Correction of the development questions involves a rubric (answer key) with a standard number of key elements that should be in the answer. It is also possible for you to answer something that is correct but not part of the answer key. If that is considered correct, you will receive credit for that as well. Do not simply repeat the facts stated in the question, this is a given and will not result in any credit. There is no specific length to a correct answer, however answers should be succinct and to the point.

 Generally answers should not exceed 2 handwritten pages. A long drawn out answer, essentially a summary of the laws, which apply to a dismissal, will be a sign that you are just throwing stuff out there hoping some of it will be correct. Irrelevant arguments and answers will result in deductions and will also dilute any good arguments in your answer. You should make clear and direct reference to the relevant laws discussed in the textbook and in lectures, as well as the legal principle drawn from these laws, which apply to the resolution of each issue you have identified. Similarly, if one of the required cases at the end of the chapter is relevant to the identified issue, use the reasoning from the case to support your answer. Is the 2-week notice of termination sufficient or can she claim more? Why or why not? Can she claim re-instatement? Why or why not? Is the non-competition clause in her contract valid? Why or why not? Support your answers with specific references to the relevant laws and any cases, which are applicable to this situation.