Case Study and Business Law

Running head: CASE STUDY AND BUSINESS LAW
CASE STUDY AND BUSINESS LAW
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1CASE STUDY AND BUSINESS LAW
Introduction
The aim of this paper is to analyse the issue of the two case studies in understanding the nuances
of the same. it has been observed that the two case studies presented here is about two different
scenarios while the first one deals with the situation of one of the job applicants whose political
views and affiliation to one political party led to the rejection of the same job, in case of the
second case study, it is crucial to understand the fact that Zeb being one of the prisoners has
created tremendous pain and injury to Helen in the process of escape. The aim of this paper is
to highlight and understand the issue the legal actions to be undertaken for the purpose and the
critical understanding of the issue from the point of view the victims and the victimised.
Discussion
It has been observed in the first case study of Nesbitt being one of the graduated from the
Brainiac, has been unduly rejected by Dewey on the ground of him being an ardent supporter of
the Freedom party. It seems that Nesbitt is not going to take it down and he will be undertaking
legal actions against Dewey on the ground that it is against the basic human rights to reject due
to the belief or affiliations to any parties. Form the point of view of Nesbiit, it is justified to
undertake some legal actions since according to the laws based on Canada, it is significant to
note that protection of the individual right are ensured by the federal, provincial and the
territorial laws of the laws. Under the Canadian Human rights protection act. Any form of
discrimination based on the gender, ethnicity or other grounds like that of belief system or
affiliations to one particular group of party is not susceptible to discrimination(Bellamy, 2019).
In case of Nesbiit, it is important to consider the fact that it is the duty of the organization to
accommodate people with difference in order reduce the existing difference among people.

2CASE STUDY AND BUSINESS LAW
There have been longstanding debated on the issue of discrimination in employments due to
political affiliations in one of the parties. These debate is essential to understand by undertaking
the argument from both the parties. In case of the employers, right to dissent and express one’s
one viewpoint is central to the democracy dissent to someone’s political views are natural and
accepted as long it does not violate the rights of the other. This is significant to understand at
this juncture that the issue of Charter of rights act, section 2(b), which clearly mentions everyone
has the right to have their personal opinion and their due expression (Laws-lois.justice.gc.ca.
2019). Hence it is not justified from the point of view of the employer reject the application of
Nesbitt on the round of affiliation to the freedom party. It is personal to keep one’ s one belief to
anything which does not infringe other’s rights on the same and this cannot be the ground for
any discrimination in employment which is based on the academic merit and not political views
of anyone. The issue for the private employee are clear cut since it is important to ensure that
the employees cannot discriminated on the ground of political affiliations of anyone(Laws-
lois.justice.gc.ca. 2019). This is a direct violation of their civil rights of the individual at the
position of getting an employment or already employed.
The protection of the rights of the individual are divided into four distinct categories like the
political rights, economic rights, legal rights and the egalitarians rights. In case of the issue of
employment related violation of rights, the victim must understand that it is the violation of the
egalitarian rights and undertake meaningful steps.
Provision
Some of the provisions for the same are:
“. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

3CASE STUDY AND BUSINESS LAW
Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and
other media of communication”( Canada, 2019).
Similar provisions
“Similar provisions may be found in the following Canadian laws and international
instruments binding on Canada: sections 1(d) and (f) of the Canadian Bill of Rights; article
10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; article 13 of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child; article 5(d)(viii) of the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Racial Discrimination; article 21 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities; article IV of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man”
(Canada, 2019)
The protection of freedom of expression is premised upon fundamental principles and
values that promote the search for and attainment of truth, participation in social and
political decision-making and the opportunity for individual self-fulfilment through
expression (Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927 at 976; Ford
v. Quebec, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712 at 765-766).
“The Supreme Court of Canada has maintained that the connection between freedom of
expression and the political process is “perhaps the linchpin” of section 2(b) protection (R.
v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697; Thomson Newspapers Co. v. Canada (A.G.), [1998] 1
S.C.R. 877; Harper v. Canada (Attorney General), [2004] 1 S.C.R. 827). Free expression is