The Canadian TrademarksAct provides parties the ability to protect distinctive terms, symbols, colors and designs used to brand their business and products. Refer to your textbook to determine which of the following statements about trademark law is FALSE. 0 a. A trademark cannot contains names, portraits or signature of individuals, without their consent. 0 b. Brand names and company logos have value, thus a registered trademark is an asset. O C. Visual components, be they designs, colors or phrases, can trademarked whereas sounds cannot. 0 d. A trademark identifies the source or manufacturer of the product rather than the product itself. Find the court's decision in Merrill Lynch Canada Inc. v. Soost, 2010 ABCA 251. It will be helpful to read the case in its entirety before answering the following question. With respect to the award of damages in this wrongful dismissal case, which one of the following statements is FALSE? Select one: O a. The Court of Appeal stressed that to justify an award for Honda damages, there needs to be unfairness or insensitivity in the methods used to dismiss. The mere fact of dismissal does not justify an additional award. Dismissal itself is not a breach of the employment contract. O b. At trial, in addition to awarding damages in lieu of notice, the Trial Judge awarded the financial advisor $1.6 million "for loss of reputation and book of business" resulting from the manner of the financial advisor's dismissal. This award was overturned on appeal. O c. Although the Trial Judge found there was some merit to some of the grounds, he found that they were not sufficient to justify summary dismissal of someone in the Respondent's position. The Trial Judge assessed damages in lieu of notice at $600,000 based on a 12 month notice period. O d. Honda damages (damages in excess of those for failure to give notice or pay in lieu of notice) are an automatic enhancement of all wrongful dismissal damages. Clear my choiceQuestion 7 Find the court's decision in Merrill Lynch Canada Inc. v. Soost, 2010 ABCA 251. It will be helpful to read the case in its Not yet entirety before answering the following question. With respect to the award of damages in this wrongful dismissal answered case, which one of the following statements is FALSE? Marked out of 1.00 Select one: Remove flag O a. The Court of Appeal stressed that to justify an award for Honda damages, there needs to be unfairness or insensitivity in the methods used to dismiss. The mere fact of dismissal does not justify an additional award. Dismissal itself is not a breach of the employment contract. O b. At trial, in addition to awarding damages in lieu of notice, the Trial Judge awarded the financial advisor $1.6 million "for loss of reputation and book of business" resulting from the manner of the financial advisor's dismissal. This award was overturned on appeal. O c. Although the Trial Judge found there was some merit to some of the grounds, he found that they were not sufficient to justify summary dismissal of someone in the Respondent's position. The Trial Judge assessed damages in lieu of notice at $600,000 based on a 12 month notice period. O d. Honda damages (damages in excess of those for failure to give notice or pay in lieu of notice) are an automatic enhancement of all wrongful dismissal damages. Clear my choice\"\"35\"" 12 Individuals who face discrimination may proceed to file a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Before ling such a complaint, several self-assessment questions should be addressed. Which of the following is NOT a relevant question Not yet to determining whether your complaint falls within the Act? an swered Marked out of 00 Select one. if Remove ag 0 5. Did the incident take place in one of the areas protected under the Act, such as employment? 0 b. Did the possible discrimination happen in Alberta or by an Alberta organization? 6) c. Were you treated unfairly because of your social status in the community? 0 d. Did at least one ofthe incidents in question take place less than one year ago? Clear my choice Queslion 1 3 Not yet answered Marked out of 100 V Flag question Refer to the Alberta Human Rights Commission's publication "Defences To Human Rights Com plaints\". According to that document, which of the following statements is TRUE? 0 a. One difference between section 10.1 of the Alberta Human Rights Actand section 15(2) of the Charteris that section 15.2 of the Charter requires that the ameliorative program in question achieves or is reasonably likely to achieve its ameliorative objective. 0 b. Once it is established that a standard results in prima facie discrimination, the next question is whether the prima facie discrimination is reasonable and justifiable. This examination involves a three-step test established by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1999 Cartercase. O c. The person or organization defending the policy, program, or activity on the grounds that it is ameliorative will need only to show that it was designed with the objective to improve the conditions ofa certain group of persons. d. Once prima facie discrimination is established, it will be presumed to be discrimination until proven otherwise. The person defending the policy, program, or activity, may argue that it is ameliorative, and therefore, not in contravention of the law. Clear my choice Question 1 4 Not yet an swered Marked out of 100 F Flag question Review the August 2021 decision of the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal in Beaudfn vZa/e Canada Co. o/a Peoples jewellers. The Chief of the Commission and Tribunals was required to review the record of the director's decision and decide whether the complaint should have been dismissed. Which of the following was not expressed as a factor inuencing his decision? a. Whether the policy was introduced for a valid and legitimate business purpose. 0 b. Whether the respondent was merely using "legal jargon". O 0. Whether the policy was introduced in good faith. 0 d. Whether there were alternatives available to accommodate those negatively affected, without incurring undue hardship. Clear my choice Question 15 Not yet answered Marked out of 1.00 'f' Flag question Refer to the LawNow article, "Disabilities and Addiction in the Workplace" written by Myrna El Fakhry Tuttle. Tuttle makes reference to the Supreme Court decision in Stewart vElk Valley Coal Corp, 2017 SEC 30. According to the article, which of the following statements is FALSE? Select one: Q a. The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal found that Mr. Stewart established a case of prima facie discrimination. b. The employer implemented the Alcohol, Illegal Drugs & Medications Policy, aimed at ensuring safety in the mine. Employees were expected to disclose any dependence or addiction issues before any drug-related incident occurred. If they did, they would be offered treatment. 0 0. Mr. Stewart, through his union representative, argued that he was terminated for addiction and that this constituted discrimination under section 7(1) of the Alberta Human Rights, Citizenship and Multiculturalism Act(now Alberta Human Rights Act). 0 d. To make a case of prima facie discrimination, complainants are required to show that they have a characteristic protected from discrimination; that they experienced an adverse impact with respect to the service; and that the protected characteristic was a factor in the adverse impact. Clear my choice