Boucher v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp.
Boucher v Wal-Mart: Constructive Dismissal & Damages Appeal
Summary
This is an appeal from a jury verdict in a wrongful dismissal and tort action involving constructive dismissal due to workplace harassment. The trial jury awarded $100,000 in compensatory damages for intentional infliction of mental suffering, $200,000 in aggravated damages, and $1,150,000 in punitive damages. The appeal focused on the reasonableness of these awards and the limitation of future loss of income.
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Award
Jury awards of $100,000 compensatory, $200,000 aggravated, and $1,150,000 punitive damages were reduced on appeal.
Key Factors
- constructive dismissal
- workplace harassment
- intentional infliction of mental suffering
- punitive damages
- aggravated damages
Related Cases
Taylor v. Salytics Inc.
2026 ONCA 621 (CanLII) · 2026-09-03Taylor v. Salytics: Constructive Dismissal Appeal
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal challenging a ruling that a temporary lay-off clause was not a termination clause under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The court addressed whether the lay-off constituted constructive dismissal at common law and interpreted the employment agreement's substance over form, confirming that the clause incorporated ESA requirements.
Faragher v. ProRich Seeds (2016) Inc.
2026 ONSC 4161 (CanLII) · 2026-07-16Constructive Dismissal: Dependent Contractor Awarded 21 Months Notice
This case addresses whether a salesperson was an employee, independent contractor, or dependent contractor, ultimately finding dependent contractor status. The court held that the employer's unilateral withholding of a long-standing monthly advance constituted constructive dismissal, entitling the plaintiff to reasonable notice.
Nielson v. Township of Morley
2026 ONSC 3772 (CanLII) · 2026-06-26Constructive Dismissal: Potter Test Applied
This wrongful dismissal case addressed whether the Township of Morley's actions constituted a constructive dismissal of the employee. The court found that the employer did not unilaterally change an essential term of the contract and that a reasonable employee would have persevered, thus constructive dismissal was not established. Consequently, the claim for damages was dismissed, although an alternative assessment of notice was noted as one year reduced to six months had liability been found.
Flegg v. Sigma Lithium Corporation
2026 ONSC 2596 (CanLII) · 2026-05-01Constructive Dismissal: Damages for Unilateral Modifications
This case addresses whether unilateral modifications to duties and marginalization amounted to constructive dismissal, applying the Bardol factors to determine reasonable notice. The court found constructive dismissal established and awarded damages in lieu of notice, along with aggravated and punitive damages due to the employer's egregious conduct.
Smith v. Rotalec Canada Inc.
2026 ONSC 2310 (CanLII) · 2026-04-20Employment: Leave to Amend Pleadings for Corporate Veil
This is a procedural ruling on a motion to amend pleadings in an employment law action involving constructive dismissal and unpaid commissions. The court granted leave to add corporate veil allegations against a directing mind, finding that a reasonable cause of action was disclosed and that the amendments were not time-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Ontario Severance is an educational tool. If you are facing a serious employment law matter, consult with a qualified employment lawyer in Ontario.