(Solved): Review the Ontario Supreme Court decision in Agosta v. Longo Brothers Fruit Markets Inc. Which of th ...

Review the Ontario Supreme Court decision in Agosta v. Longo Brothers Fruit Markets Inc. Which of the following statements FAILS to describe findings made in that case? The evidence confirmed that samples could be only taken away from the store if the store manager or his assistant was advised first and had consented. The judge found that the employment relationship had not, in the instant case, been irreparably damaged by the conduct of the plaintiff. Considering the principle of proportionality and the importance of one's work to his or her sense of identity, the transgression was not so grave as to justify dismissal. Distefano, the acting store manager, confirmed that he had not been asked by Agosta for consent to remove the 5 items from the store, and the plaintiff confirmed that he knew the 5 items were still owned by Longo at the time he removed them from the store. Agosta was 47 years old at the time of his termination. He worked in the retail food business for 31 years, and in December of 2000, Agosta was promoted to the position of dairy manager at a new Longo (meation, referred to as the York Mills store. As a key holder, he had authority to open and close the store, in certain circumstances.