W. v. S.
W. v. S. - Vicarious Liability for Employee Assault
Summary
This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a trial judgment involving a private health clinic and an ultrasound technician. A patient was sexually assaulted and videotaped by the technician during her appointment. The trial judge and jury found both the technician and the clinic liable, including finding the clinic vicariously liable for the technician's actions and negligent itself. The Court of Appeal set aside the finding of negligence against the clinic, as it was unreasonable, but upheld the clinic's vicarious liability. The Court of Appeal also significantly reduced the non-pecuniary and aggravated damages from $350,000 to $25,000, finding the original award to be a wholly erroneous estimate.
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Award
$25,000 for general and aggravated damages, $43,500.32 past income loss, $31,200.00 future care costs
Key Factors
- vicarious liability
- course and scope of employment
- assessment of damages
- standard of review for jury awards
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 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.