Re M. et al. and Douglas Aircraft Co. of Canada Ltd. et al.
Union Officials' Duties and Arbitration Jurisdiction in Collective Agreements
Summary
A labour and employment case involving the interpretation of a collective agreement and the duties of union officials. The court addressed whether union officials owe a special duty to the employer by virtue of their union office and whether an arbitrator exceeded their jurisdiction by implying such a duty. The arbitration award was quashed due to jurisdictional overreach. The case later reached the Supreme Court of Canada (Douglas Aircraft Co. of Canada v. M., [1980] 1 SCR 245). The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and restored the arbitrator's awards dismissing the grievances of all the respondents. The discharges of the grievors for their roles in the illegal strike were upheld.
Outcome
Arbitration award quashed due to jurisdictional overreach
Award
Arbitration award quashed and grievances remitted to a new arbitrator for reconsideration
Key Factors
- collective agreements
- union officials' duties
- arbitrator's jurisdiction
- interpretation of collective agreement
- penalty modification
Related Cases
N. v. Liquor Control Board of Ontario
2026 ONSC 5520 (CanLII) · 2026-10-01N. v. LCBO: Judicial Review of Termination Dismissed
This is a judicial review application concerning the termination of an employee by the Liquor Control Board of Ontario. The applicant sought to challenge the termination as an exercise of statutory power, but the Divisional Court found no jurisdiction for judicial review, noting the dispute was governed by a collective agreement and subject to grievance arbitration. The application was dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process.
H. v. Cronos Group Inc.
2026 ONSC 5231 (CanLII) · 2026-09-16H. v. Cronos Group Inc. - Summary Judgment Dismissed
This is a procedural ruling on a motion for summary judgment in an employment dispute concerning stock options and termination agreements. The court dismissed the motion, finding that genuine issues for trial existed regarding the value of unexercised options, equitable set-off, and limitation periods, necessitating a full trial.
B. v. Van Dolder’s Home Team Inc.
2026 ONCA 568 (CanLII) · 2026-08-06Ontario CA: Termination Clause Enforceability Under ESA
The Court of Appeal for Ontario heard appeals regarding the enforceability of termination clauses in employment contracts under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The court addressed whether phrases like 'at any time' and 'for any reason' invalidate without cause termination provisions and whether 'just cause' definitions broader than 'wilful misconduct' are enforceable when minimum ESA entitlements are preserved. The court allowed the appeal in B. and dismissed the appeal in Li, confirming that referential incorporation of ESA entitlements is acceptable and declining to reconsider the Waksdale precedent.
F. v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada
2026 ONSC 1855 (CanLII) · 2026-04-28F. 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.
C. v. H. 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.
More Ontario employment decisions from the 1970s
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.