Sentences with phrase «period than the plaintiff»

The plaintiff was off work for a considerably longer period than the plaintiff in Wepryk v. Juraschka, 2012 BCSC 974.

Not exact matches

Having regard to the fact that the respondent is older than Ms. Sharma, that he has no realistic possibility of obtaining similar employment and that he had a longer tenure of service than Ms. Sharma, but considerably less than the plaintiff in Di Tomaso v. Crown Metal Manufacturing Packaging Canada LP, 2010 O.J. No. 4414, we conclude that an appropriate notice period is 18 months.

The plaintiff sought to certify this class on behalf of more than 300 nursing home residents, arguing that every single resident received inadequate medical care over a four - year period.

The median, however, is much lower than the average in both time periods, meaning that most successful plaintiffs are awarded less than the average.

In both periods, then, the median award is significantly less than the average, which means that most plaintiffs were awarded significantly less than the average.

That is, there is no evidence that corporations were awarded higher damages, relative to human plaintiffs, in the later period than in the earlier period.

The plaintiff, however, claimed that because the defendants» insurance company confirmed her cause of action in April or May of 2010 the limitation period ran from then rather than from the date of the accident (Limitations Act, s. 16).

All of the alleged misconduct had occurred more than four years before the plaintiffs had filed their complaint, the court determined, and the plaintiffs failed to show that the four - year limitations period for RICO claims should be tolled.

The judge said the plaintiff's age, his position as the Canadian manager of CEVA's operations responsible for more than 500 employees and sales in excess of $ 140 million annually, the limited number of similar positions in Canada, and the requirement that he make a significant investment with the company all point to a lengthy notice period.

Despite the plaintiff's complete failure to mitigate his damages and the unreasonableness of his decision to enter into self - employment, Browne J only reduced the notice period from twenty months to fourteen months, rather than dismissing the claim entirely or reducing the notice period to a mere few months which he found to be a reasonable time period in that case to get over the shock of dismissal.

There was, however, clear evidence that the plaintiff in Johnson had skills that were valued in the industry, based on the lengthy period of time it took the defendant to replace him and a feeling in the industry at the time that there were more jobs available than there were qualified personnel.

735 ILCS 5/13-213 (d): Alternate limitation period Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (b) and (c), if the injury complained of occurs within any of the periods provided by subsections (b) and (c), the plaintiff may bring suit within 2 years after the date on which the claimant knew, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have known, of the existence of the personal injury, death, or property damage; but in no event may such an action be brought more than 8 years after the date on which the personal injury, death, or property damage occurred.

The study's author suggests various theories for the decline in the success rate, including that courts are seeking to give greater protection to freedom of expression; during the 2003 - 13 period, plaintiffs were far more successful in cases involving «new media» (email or internet), with a 62 % success rate (more than double the success rate for cases between 2003 - 13 considered as a whole).

The plaintiff, rather than continue to work through his notice period and, at its conclusion, commenced a claim for wrongful dismissal, immediately resigned from his employment.

Rather than file responding material, the plaintiff simply relied on the affidavit evidence put forward by the defendant and argued that the limitation period for his claim started when he received an expert medical report,... Read More

The Judge noted the Plaintiff's argument that the Mexican proceeding dealt with a different time period of his employment than the Ontairo action.