B. v. Waterloo Regional Board of Commissioners of Police (No. 2)
Wrongful Dismissal: Chief of Police Entitled to Salary and Fringe Benefits
Summary
A wrongful dismissal case involving a chief of police who was dismissed and sought compensation for salary and fringe benefits. The court of appeal found the dismissal ineffective, entitling the plaintiff to salary and fringe benefits until legal termination. The case addressed whether the plaintiff was entitled to compensation for benefits despite not performing duties, with the governing principle that damages for wrongful dismissal include salary and reasonable fringe benefits equivalent to those of a successor.
Outcome
Plaintiff entitled to salary and fringe benefits until legal termination of office
Award
Plaintiff entitled to salary and reasonable fringe benefits equivalent to those of a successor, including cleaning allowance and full car allowance as personal benefits; membership and conference fees restored as reasonable for professional association and personal benefit; uniform allowance disallowed as entirely work-related.
Key Factors
- wrongful dismissal
- fringe benefits
- damages calculation
- economic equivalence
- compensable benefits
Related Cases
P. v. Sky Service F.B.O. Inc.
2026 ONSC 5334 (CanLII) · 2026-09-18Wrongful Dismissal: Appeal Dismissed as Statute-Barred
The Divisional Court dismissed an appeal from a motion judge's decision granting summary judgment to the employer, ruling that the employee's wrongful dismissal claim was statute-barred. The court applied the Limitations Act, 2002, finding that the limitation period began on the date of dismissal and was not postponed by the claimant's misunderstanding of legal significance or by commencing proceedings in the wrong forum.
B. et al. v. Guycan Ltd.
2026 ONSC 5209 (CanLII) · 2026-09-14Wrongful Dismissal: Employee Status and Unpaid Commissions
This is a merits decision in a wrongful dismissal case involving an individual who worked through a personal corporation. The court determined the individual was an employee rather than an independent contractor, rejected the claim of constructive dismissal, and found that the individual had resigned. The court awarded damages for unpaid statutory public holiday pay and commissions, but found no entitlement to pay in lieu of reasonable notice.
K. v. Crossbridge Condominium Services Ltd.
2026 ONCA 636 (CanLII) · 2026-09-10Wrongful Dismissal: Successor Liability & Notice Appeal
This is an appeal from a motion judge's decision granting summary judgment for common law reasonable notice and lost benefits in a wrongful dismissal case involving a building services provider. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the finding that the incoming provider was deemed an employer under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, and confirming the application of statutory interpretation principles to establish successor liability.
A. v. The Chiefs of Ontario
2026 ONSC 5099 (CanLII) · 2026-09-01This is a procedural ruling regarding the award of substantial indemnity costs in a dispute involving the Chiefs of Ontario. The court considered whether the conduct of the parties warranted such costs, addressing issues of vexatious conduct by a self-represented litigant and the reasonableness of costs at the preliminary motion stage.
H. v. 1359768 Ontario Inc. (B&B Towing)
2026 ONCA 577 (CanLII) · 2026-08-10Wrongful Dismissal: Frustration & Company Asset Damages
This is an appeal from a wrongful dismissal decision where the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the appeal regarding the issue of frustration of contract. The court found that the employment contract was not frustrated because the employee's essential duties were accommodable and there was a reasonable likelihood of return to work. Additionally, the court reduced the damages award by disallowing compensation for the loss of use of a company tow truck and cellphone, determining these were work tools rather than perquisites.
More Ontario employment decisions from the 1980s
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.