In the Matter of the Proposal of Metroland Media Group Ltd.
Employee Rep in Insolvency: Metroland Media
Summary
This is an interlocutory proceeding regarding the appointment of Representative Counsel and an ad hoc committee to represent non-unionized employees of Metroland Media Group Ltd. during insolvency proceedings. The court addressed whether such representation was necessary to protect vulnerable stakeholders' claims for severance, pension, and benefits, and whether personal information could be disclosed to counsel under PIPEDA. The court also determined that the debtor should bear the reasonable legal costs of the Representative Counsel.
Outcome
Appointment of Representative Counsel and ad hoc committee approved; costs borne by debtor; disclosure of personal information authorized.
Award
Legal costs of Representative Counsel to be borne by the debtor.
Key Factors
- employee representation
- insolvency proceedings
- severance claims
- PIPEDA disclosure
- legal costs
Related Cases
Khatib v. GoEasy Ltd
2026 ONSC 4238 (CanLII) · 2026-07-21Wrongful Dismissal: RSU Dividends Included in Severance
This is a post-judgment procedural ruling regarding the calculation of damages in a wrongful dismissal case. The court issued supplemental reasons to clarify that dividends flowing from a granted RSU are part of the plaintiff's Long-Term Incentive Plan award, rejecting the defendant's objection to their inclusion in the damages calculation.
1001270243 Ontario Inc.
2026 ONSC 3967 (CanLII) · 2026-07-07CCAA: ResidualCo as Former Employer under WEPPA
A procedural application in CCAA proceedings seeking declarations on whether a residual company qualifies as a 'former employer' under the Wage Earner Protection Program Act (WEPPA) following a reverse vesting transaction. The court determined that the residual company was the former employer and granted declarations under the relevant statutes to facilitate employee wage claims.
McCoubrey v. Salesfloor Inc.
2025 ONSC 3739 (CanLII) · 2025-06-24Unpaid Commissions: Resignation & Policy Incorporation
This case concerns a dispute over unpaid commissions owed to a former employee after her resignation. The court determined that the 2020 Commission Policy governed the plaintiff's entitlements because she did not consent to the 2021 policy changes. Applying the principle of contra proferentem to resolve ambiguities in the disbursement clause, the court found the plaintiff was the effective cause of the deals and entitled to the commissions earned before her resignation.
Brown v The Bank of Nova Scotia
2025 ONSC 323 (CanLII) · 2025-01-14Brown v Bank of Nova Scotia: Privilege in Employment Docs
This is an interlocutory motion concerning document production in an employment dispute where the plaintiff challenged the defendant's claims of solicitor-client and litigation privilege over workplace investigation documents. The court addressed whether common interest privilege applied and affirmed the defendant's search efforts, while deferring costs to avoid halting the litigation.
Nordstrom Canada Retail, Inc.
2023 ONSC 1422 (CanLII) · 2023-03-03CCAA: Employee Trust for Severance Pay
This is an interlocutory proceeding in a CCAA insolvency case where the court addressed the wind-down of Nordstrom Canada's operations. A key issue was the approval of an Employee Trust to ensure financial security for employees and compliance with employment standards legislation regarding termination and severance pay during the liquidation process.
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.