Assignment Task:
Background Story In 2019, the Winnipeg Jets and Dustin Byfuglien went before an arbitrator (retired Judge) to discuss if Byfuglien should be paid his $8 million USD salary as he was injured. There were a few issues at play here for the arbitrator to use for a judgement. • The team doctor and Byfuglien signed off a document stating that Dustin was healthy at the end of the season in May 2019. Every player has to sign off on the physical as well as the doctor. Both Byfuglien and the doctor signed off meaning that at the end of the season, he was deemed healthy. • In August 2019, Byfuglien returned to Winnipeg and asked Jets management for time to think about his playing future. He did not report to training camp and the Jets gave him the time and space he needed to make his decision. • Several weeks passed without any commitment from Dustin. The Jets then suspended him without pay at the start of the 2019 season in October. The Jets did this for salary cap reasons and because you cannot pay someone who has not reported to work. • Unknow to the Jets, Byfuglien independently went and had ankle surgery the summer of 2019. He told the Jets about the surgery after the operation. He also said his foot was broken and the team did not know about it nor did he tell them. As far as the timeline goes, it seems like the Jets were set on giving Byfuglien the time and space needed to make an informed decision about his future. There is no evidence that Byfuglien did not re-injure his ankle or break his foot over the 2019 summer. An aside about ankles: people with a history of ankle injuries may need to go physio more than once. With a bad sprain, at some point the joint is compromised and the ankle is permanently damaged and will always sprain/roll easily now. If this is the case with Byfuglien, and we don't know the nature of his ankle injury, this could be why Byfuglien developed more ankle issues over the summer or his ankle never fully healed. Byfuglien's lawyer had argued in arbitration that Byfuglien was not suspended because he was injured, but because he did not report for training camp. Had he reported to training camp and then told the Jets his ankle was bothering him, he would have been fine. The suspendable act was not showing up. Byfuglien wanted to get paid, but the facts are he did not show up at camp and to top it off, he got surgery on his ankle without telling the Jets.
Please answer the following questions based on the information above:
1. What kind of contract (oral or written and expressed or implied) do you think was negotiated between the Winnipeg Jets and Mr. Byfuglien in the past? Explain your answer
2. Was this an employment contract? What conditions (4 or more) do you think would have been written into Dustin's contracts?
3. Of the three problems (legality, capacity & voluntariness) arising in this contract dispute, which one is the most applicable and why?
4. Based on the five ways a contract can be terminated (performance, agreement, frustration, operation and breach), what do you think is the most important or applicable argument in this situation and why?
5. Was Dustin on strike or was it implied repudiation or neither? Did the Jets lock him out in this dispute?
6. As the arbitrator, make your decision and explain why? Give two specific legal reasons with details