Nicolardi v. Canadian Tire Corporation
Substitution of Corporate Representative in Employment Discovery
Summary
This is an interlocutory motion regarding the selection of a corporate representative for examination for discovery in a lawsuit involving the termination of employment. The plaintiff sought to examine a Board member, but the court found the individual lacked sufficient knowledge or involvement in the matters at issue. The court granted the defendants' motion to substitute the representative with the Associate Vice President of Human Resources, who had direct involvement in the termination and related policies.
Outcome
Motion to substitute corporate representative granted; plaintiff ordered to pay costs.
Award
Costs of $17,000 awarded to the defendants.
Key Factors
- corporate representative discovery
- Rule 31.03(2)(a)
- termination of employment
- undue burden
- knowledge and involvement
Related Cases
Fawcett v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada
2026 ONSC 1855 (CanLII) · 2026-04-28Fawcett v. Sun Life: Jurisdiction & LTD Dismissal
This case addresses whether a dispute arising from an employee's resignation and termination falls under exclusive arbitral jurisdiction via a collective agreement or can proceed as a civil claim for negligent misrepresentation. The court also examined whether an insurer's summary judgment regarding the termination of long-term disability benefits should be granted, finding genuine issues for trial regarding policy administration and credibility.
Chhelavda v. Huszti et al
2026 ONSC 2194 (CanLII) · 2026-04-13Fixed-Term Termination: Unenforceable Clauses & Liability
This case involves a determination on the enforceability of termination clauses in an employment contract and the remedies available for the early termination of a fixed-term agreement. The court found the termination provisions unenforceable due to non-compliance with minimum standards, applying principles from Waksdale v. Swegon North America. Additionally, the court confirmed the employee's entitlement to wages for the balance of the fixed term, citing Howard v. Benson Group Inc., and held individual defendants jointly and severally liable alongside the corporation following a default judgment.
Stribling v. Starbucks Coffee Canada Inc.
2026 ONSC 1030 (CanLII) · 2026-02-18Starbucks Settlement Enforceability: Repudiation & Duress
This is a summary judgment motion concerning the enforceability of a settlement agreement reached in the context of an employee's termination. The court addressed whether an email acceptance created a binding contract despite an unsigned release, whether the employer's erroneous 'for-cause' letter constituted repudiation, and whether the employee was subjected to financial duress. The motion judge found the settlement enforceable and dismissed the action.
Orr v Direct Coil Inc.
2026 CanLII 77416 (ON SCSM) · 2026-01-26Dismissal for Cause: HR Employee Confidentiality Breach
This case addresses whether an employer had just cause to dismiss an HR employee for breach of confidentiality and dishonesty, applying the McKinley and Dowling standards regarding trust in sensitive positions. The court upheld the dismissal for cause, finding that the misuse of personnel records and repeated denials were incompatible with continued employment. Additionally, claims for aggravated damages based on the manner of dismissal and human rights discrimination were dismissed.
Cross v. Cooling Tower Maintenance Inc.
2025 ONSC 7203 (CanLII) · 2025-12-23Settlement Agreement Repudiation & Lump Sum Dispute
This is a summary judgment decision regarding a dispute over a settlement agreement entered into upon the termination of employment. The court addressed whether the employer's failure to disclose re-employment opportunities repudiated the agreement and whether the cessation of payments extinguished a fifty percent lump sum obligation. The court found that the agreement was not repudiated and that the employer was in breach for failing to pay the lump sum, ordering payment while dismissing the employee's claim for aggravated or punitive damages due to lack of evidence regarding heightened duties of loyalty.
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.