In Grant v Electra Signs, the Court of Appeal was dealing with a decision of the Queens Bench which awarded a 63 year old GM with 13.5 years service the following:
a) 12 months reasonable notice.
b) Plus 2 extra months for the manner of dismissal ( Keays v Honda ).
c) Less 4 months notice for poor mitigation.
Thus the plaintiff was awarded 10 months .
The CA ruled that :
a) 12 months was reasonable and that there is no rigid rule in Manitoba that one year of service = 2/3 of a month notice.
b) To award Honda damages based on an increased notice period is wrong in law and although medical evidence is not required there must be some evidence that the plaintiff suffered some damages in excess of the normal feelings upon losing one’s job.
c) Even though the plaintiff did nothing to look for a job, the failure of the Defendant to show that had he looked for a job within the notice period that he could have lessened his damages was fatal to their argument and thus no reduction of the notice period was appropriate.
In the end the Plaintiff got 12 months notice.