In late August, after a “date night” at a local casino with his spouse, an assistant fire chief Mr. Bailey was pulled ov

[answerhappygod]

In late August, after a “date night” at a local casino with his
spouse, an assistant fire chief Mr. Bailey was pulled over as he
was driving home by the RCMP. He was caught speeding. When the RCMP
officer asked him for his license, he was told by Mr. Bailey that
he was out for a date with his wife and he had been working very
hard due to the forest fire season in the area and was tired. The
RCMP officer smelled alcohol and asked Mr. Bailey to take a
breathalyzer test. Mr. Bailey failed the test and then the RCMP
officer asked him to come to the station for a second test which he
also failed. The RCMP impounded the truck he was driving and Mr.
Bailey was given a 90 day ban on driving. Mr. Bailey at the time
had been driving an unmarked fire department pickup truck. When his
employer – the City – learned that this happened, the Mayor and
City Council and its Chief Administrative Officer found out about
these facts, Mr. Bailey was terminated with cause after they
completed a review and verified all facts. Mr. Bailey was an
exemplary employee and had never been in trouble with the law. This
decision was made by the parties mentioned above despite the City’s
fire chief recommending a suspension. Mr. Bailey plans to sue the
City.
What is the main legal issue? 1 mark
What is the main legal test/rule of law governing this issue? 1
mark
What is an argument for the plaintiff? 1 mark
What is an argument for the defendant? 1 mark
Who wins and why? 1 mark