R. v. Bell Canada
Pension Benefits: Bell Canada Appeal Dismissed
Summary
This decision is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision concerning an employee pension plan. The appellants, Vasundara and G.R., argued they were entitled to a pension option not contained in the Bell Canada pension plan. The motion judge found that the respondents had no legal obligation to offer this option. The Court of Appeal agreed and held there was no statutory or common law obligation to offer the option under the Pension Benefits Standards Act. The appeal was dismissed, with costs of $3000 awarded to each respondent.
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Key Factors
- pension benefits
- statutory interpretation
- Pension Benefits Standards Act
- appeal dismissed
- costs
Related Cases
M. v. Blue Line Distribution Limited et al.
2026 ONSC 4784 (CanLII) · 2026-08-18Employment Case: Default Judgment & Simplified Procedure
This is a procedural motion in an employment-related action concerning default judgment, simplified procedure jurisdiction, and venue. The court adjourned multiple motions without prejudice due to issues with service on dissolved corporations, the monetary cap for simplified procedure, and the admissibility of hearsay evidence to prove unliquidated damages.
F. v. P.
2026 ONCA 277 (CanLII) · 2026-04-17F. v. P.: Employer Wins Summary Judgment for Fraud
This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a summary judgment decision in an action for fraud, conversion, and breach of fiduciary duty against a former employee. The employer, Capital Canada, and its owner sued the former office manager and her husband after discovering unauthorized transfers of over $1.1 million from the owner's personal accounts to the employee. The motion judge granted summary judgment against the employee for damages and punitive damages, and ordered a reference to trace funds to her husband for a knowing receipt claim. The Court of Appeal dismissed the employee's appeal, except to set aside the punitive damages award in favour of the corporate employer, finding the motion judge made no reversible error in concluding she misappropriated the funds. The Court of Appeal allowed the husband's appeal, dismissing the knowing assistance claim and directing the knowing receipt claim to trial because actual receipt of funds by him was a genuine issue requiring a trial.
Geopro Consulting Ltd v. N.
2026 ONSC 1517 (CanLII) · 2026-03-12Absolute Privilege in Professional Complaints
This is a procedural ruling on a Rule 21 motion to strike a statement of claim. The court determined that communications made to the Professional Geoscientists Ontario were absolutely privileged and that the action constituted an abuse of process, leading to the dismissal of the claim.
V.D. v. Canadian Nuclear Laboratories
2026 ONSC 1035 (CanLII) · 2026-03-03This is a procedural ruling in an employment dispute concerning motions for particulars and discovery. The court addressed whether defendants were entitled to full particulars after delivering a defence and whether specific documents (DEI Survey and Ombudsperson Report) were discoverable, ultimately dismissing the motions to strike and for a protective order.
Re 1242939 B.C. Unlimited Liability Company et al (formerly Hudson's Bay Company ULC et al)
2026 ONSC 898 (CanLII) · 2026-02-13A procedural ruling in a CCAA insolvency proceeding concerning the approval of a settlement term sheet and third-party releases affecting employees, specifically addressing the characterization of hardship payments for Extended LTD recipients and the granting of a sealing order to protect their confidential information.
More Ontario employment decisions from 2012
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.