Ontario Severance6,425 Ontario employment decisions from CanLII. Describe your situation to find the closest ones, or narrow them by topic.
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.
This is a judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario decision where the Tribunal had dismissed an application on a preliminary basis. The Divisional Court quashed the dismissal decision, finding the Tribunal unreasonably relied on a WSIB decision that did not address accommodation issues, thereby allowing the human rights application to proceed.
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.
This was a motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal from a Divisional Court decision dismissing an application for judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario decision. The applicant, a forest firefighter, alleged discrimination because his employer did not provide vegan meals, arguing ethical veganism is a creed. The parties settled the claim while a preliminary hearing on the definition of creed was pending, but the Tribunal adjudicator, unaware of the settlement, ruled ethical veganism was not a creed. The Divisional Court dismissed the applicant's judicial review as moot due to the settlement. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, holding the discretionary refusal to hear a moot case did not raise an arguable question of public importance.
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.
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.
This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a trial judge's decision dismissing the plaintiffs' claims and allowing the defendants' counterclaim for breach of contract. The employee and his company claimed breach of confidence, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of a joint venture agreement regarding a research and development project, while the employer counterclaimed for negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract. The trial judge dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and awarded $1 to the employer on the counterclaim because the employee took work product when he resigned. The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of the plaintiffs' claims because they were employees and commercial parties with no joint venture or fiduciary relationship, but allowed the appeal on the counterclaim, dismissing it because the breach was not pleaded and there was no evidence of what was taken. The costs appeal was dismissed.
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.
This interlocutory proceeding addressed whether the employer established a strong prima facie case to restrain a former employee from breaching non-solicitation and confidentiality obligations under their employment agreement. The court assessed the reasonableness of restrictive covenants and the handling of confidential information on personal devices, ultimately refusing the injunction as the prima facie case was not met.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed an appeal challenging a ruling that a temporary lay-off clause was not a termination clause under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The court addressed whether the lay-off constituted constructive dismissal at common law and interpreted the employment agreement's substance over form, confirming that the clause incorporated ESA requirements.
This 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.
This is a judicial review of a labour arbitration award concerning the distribution of weekend overtime under a collective agreement. The Divisional Court applied the Vavilov reasonableness framework and found the arbitrator's decision unreasonable for failing to address the Letter of Understanding and the central issue of student overtime compensation. The court set aside the award and remitted the matter to a different arbitrator for reconsideration.
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.
This is an interlocutory proceeding addressing subject matter jurisdiction in a labour relations dispute. The court dismissed the action, finding that the Labour Board has exclusive jurisdiction over the union's internal disciplinary process and allegations of procedural unfairness under the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act.
This is a judicial review application brought by the union challenging a labour arbitrator's decision regarding grievance arbitration and occupational health and safety obligations. The Divisional Court reviewed the application, finding that the arbitrator's application of issue estoppel and balancing of finality and fairness was reasonable and that no distinct contractual obligation existed beyond the OHSA duties.
This is an appeal to the Divisional Court from a trial decision regarding a dispute over repayment of commission draws under an employment contract. The court allowed the appeal, finding that the contract wording did not establish a repayment obligation and that the trial judge failed to adequately address the Employment Standards Act defence. The employee's claim for repayment was dismissed.
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.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed an appeal regarding the enforceability of termination clauses in an employment contract and the calculation of damages for wrongful dismissal. The court found that the termination provisions were unenforceable because they contravened the Employment Standards Act, 2000, specifically regarding probationary periods and the forfeiture of restricted stock units (RSUs). Consequently, the court upheld a common law notice period of 10 months and awarded damages for the RSU losses, while denying punitive damages due to the employer's conduct not being sufficiently reprehensible.
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.
This case involves a human rights complaint alleging discrimination based on disability where the plaintiff claimed a migraine disorder required accommodation from a mandatory mask policy. The court found that no prima facie discrimination was established because the link between the migraine and mask intolerance was not proven, resulting in no duty to accommodate. Additionally, the plaintiff's constructive dismissal claim was dismissed as the refusal to comply with the essential masking term constituted repudiation by the employee, though the court awarded one week of sick leave for a promised coded sick week.
This is an appeal from a motion judge's decision regarding employment status and jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal found that the appellant was an employee under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, rendering the forum selection clause void, and established that Ontario had jurisdiction over the dispute.
This is an appeal to the Divisional Court from a trial judge's decision in a constructive dismissal case involving the Susur Lee Group Inc. The appeal addressed whether the employee's silence and delayed proceedings constituted condonation of the employer's repudiatory breach, whether ESA payments during a closure amounted to a return to work, and whether continued work could serve as mitigation. The Divisional Court found legal errors in the trial judge's analysis regarding condonation, the effect of ESA payments, and mitigation, allowing the appeal and ordering a new trial.
This is a judicial review proceeding where the Divisional Court reviewed an application challenging the School Board's handling of a workplace harassment investigation. The court determined that the dispute arose from the interpretation and application of the collective agreement, granting exclusive jurisdiction to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under the Weber principle, thereby barring the court from hearing the matter.
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.
This case addresses whether a salesperson was an employee, independent contractor, or dependent contractor, ultimately finding dependent contractor status. The court held that the employer's unilateral withholding of a long-standing monthly advance constituted constructive dismissal, entitling the plaintiff to reasonable notice.
Showing 25 of 6,425
Browse every decision by year