Employee Liability — Ontario Employment Law

S. v. Starbucks Coffee Canada Inc.

Employee Personal Liability for Negligence in Employment

This is a procedural and substantive ruling regarding the personal liability of employees for negligence committed within the scope of their employment. The Court of Appeal for Ontario addressed whether employees can be held personally liable for their own negligence and whether naming them as defendants for discovery purposes constitutes an abuse of process.

Hampton Securities Limited v. T.

Employment Contract: Employee Liability for Trading Losses

This is an appeal from a motion judge's decision in an employment contract dispute where the employer sought to recover trading losses from a former employee. The Court of Appeal for Ontario upheld the motion judge's finding that there was no express or implied term making the employee personally liable for such losses, nor was there evidence supporting an industry practice to that effect.

S. v Bmo Nesbitt Burns et al.

Costs in Vicarious Liability: Employee Liability

This is a procedural costs ruling in a negligence action where individual employees were sued alongside their corporate employer. The court addressed whether employees should bear personal liability for costs when the employer is vicariously liable, finding they were not necessary parties, and determined costs based on proportionality and fairness.

Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. v. M.

Employee Fiduciary Duty & Knowing Assistance Appeal

This is an appeal regarding a judgment against a former employee of a regulated utility and third-party contractors for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and bribery. The Court of Appeal addressed whether the employee owed a fiduciary duty to the employer and whether the defendants were liable for knowing assistance and bribery. The appeal also concerned the calculation of the judgment amount, specifically regarding compound interest and the deduction of costs.

Man Financial Canada Co. v. K.

This is an appeal from a trial decision regarding an employee's liability for fraud and breach of contract in the context of forex trading. The Court of Appeal reviewed whether the trial judge erred in finding the employee liable, in providing adequate reasons, and in calculating damages for the employer's losses.

D. v. K.

Employee Liability for Negligence: D. v. K.

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a trial decision dismissing an employer's claim against an employee. The cottage owner appellant hired the 13-year-old respondent as a "boat boy". The respondent negligently caused a fire that destroyed a boathouse, and the appellant's insurer sought to recover the $285,000 loss through a subrogated claim. The trial judge dismissed the action, finding no duty of care. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that ordinary employees are generally not liable to indemnify their employers for ordinary negligence absent intentional wrongdoing or gross negligence.

D. v. Regional Group of Companies Inc.

Employee Duties and Liability Case

This is a labour law case concerning the duties and liability of an employee. The dispute arises from the employment relationship between the individual and the employer.

Martin TV and Radio Ltd. v. D.

Employment Contract: Advances Against Commissions Treated as Loan

An employment contract dispute involving an employer who advanced weekly payments to an employee against future commissions, with the employee earning less in commissions than the advances received. The court examined whether the excess advances should be treated as a loan in the absence of a contrary agreement, applying English law principles.