Comm 393 Case Briefs
Liebmann applied for the position of Executive Assistant to the Commanding Officer in the Persian Gulf Operation. Staff Officers recommended he be appointed and the Commanding Officer agreed. When command staff became aware that Liebmann was Jewish they decided not to select him. Liebmann challenged the decision, as well as CFAO 20-53 (an enactment for which the decision was based upon) under s. 15 of the Charter.
1. Should the court consider the constitutionality of CFAO 20-53?
2. Does the Charter apply to the decision not to appoint Liebmann?
3. Were Liebmann’s equality rights under s. 15 of the Charter infringed?
4. Could infringement be justified under …show more content…
1. If the plaintiffs did not knowingly consent to the “forum selection clause,” should they be bound by its terms?
2. Should the OSC forcibly override this clause to ensure fair and equitable justice is served?
• In E-commerce: web-wrap agreements sets out contractual terms, the acceptance of which is indicated by clicking “accept” on appropriate icon • Court will examine what steps seller took to bring terms to customers’ attention • Legally defensible exemption clauses will bind parties to all terms and conditions provided within the clause (where defensible means that the clause has consideration)
1. The plaintiffs were repeatedly notified of the forum selection clause when registering for the service, and by agreeing to this online contract they should be bound by its terms and by agreeing to the terms of a contract equates to agreeing to each and every term stipulated within the contract (bar fine-print that is not effectively communicated to the parties.)
a. There is no evidence that the courts in King County, WA will rule in a biased or inequitable fashion.
b. Furthermore, it will be easier and more efficient to claim any awards that the class may win