G. v. Allianz Insurance Co. of Canada
Constructive Dismissal: Systemic Discrimination Pleadings
Appeal history
- Appeal from: G. v. Allianz Insurance Co. of Canada, 2003 CanLII 5720 (ON SC)
Summary
This is an appeal from a procedural ruling in a wrongful dismissal action where the plaintiff alleged constructive dismissal based on race and ethnic origin. The Court of Appeal addressed whether allegations of systemic discrimination could be pleaded as part of a wrongful dismissal claim and reviewed the appropriateness of appellate costs.
Outcome
appeal allowed; struck pleadings reinstated
Award
Appellate costs reduced to $11,000 inclusive of disbursements and GST.
Key Factors
- constructive dismissal
- systemic discrimination
- striking out pleadings
- appellate costs
Related Cases
T. v. Salytics Inc.
2026 ONCA 621 (CanLII) · 2026-09-03T. 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.
F. v. Susur Lee Group Inc.
2026 ONSC 4380 (CanLII) · 2026-07-28Constructive Dismissal Appeal: Condonation and Mitigation
This is an appeal to the Divisional Court from a trial judge's decision in a constructive dismissal case involving the Susur Lee Group Inc. The appeal addressed whether the employee's silence and delayed proceedings constituted condonation of the employer's repudiatory breach, whether ESA payments during a closure amounted to a return to work, and whether continued work could serve as mitigation. The Divisional Court found legal errors in the trial judge's analysis regarding condonation, the effect of ESA payments, and mitigation, allowing the appeal and ordering a new trial.
F. 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.
N. 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.
F. 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.
More Ontario employment decisions from 2005
This summary was written by AI from the published decision and its headnote. It is not an official version of the decision; read the full text on CanLII before relying on it. 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.