Employment Insurance — Ontario Employment Law

B. v. University of Windsor

Appeal Dismissed: Adding Attorney General to Employment Insurance Dispute

This is an appeal from a procedural ruling in an action concerning employment insurance premium reductions between an employer and employees. The appellant sought to add the Attorney General of Canada as a defendant, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust, and negligence. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the motion judge's decision that the proposed claims were not tenable and that the correct test for adding parties had been applied.

C. v. 580 Christie Street Co-Ownership Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: Issue Estoppel from EI Decision

This wrongful dismissal case addressed whether an Employment Insurance determination of no misconduct precluded re-litigation of the issue in civil court via the doctrine of issue estoppel. The court found the preconditions for issue estoppel were not met and that EI determinations serve a different purpose than civil liability. Additionally, the court affirmed the exclusive jurisdiction of the Ontario Labour Relations Board over OHSA reprisal claims and denied a request for direct production of asbestos records.

D. v. E-D Roofing Limited

Wrongful Dismissal: 18-Year Employee Awarded 13 Months Notice

A wrongful dismissal case where the plaintiff, who had 18 years of service, was dismissed and sought a reasonable notice period. The court determined 13 months was appropriate based on Bardal factors. The plaintiff also sought employment before and after a pre-planned vacation, and the court found their efforts to mitigate damages were reasonable. The case also addressed whether Employment Insurance benefits should be deducted from damages, with the court ruling they should not.

F. v. Canada (Attorney General)

Employment Insurance and SAWP Workers: Charter Discrimination Case

A case involving the application of the Employment Insurance Act to SAWP workers, who are required to pay EI premiums but cannot access regular benefits. The court examined whether this differential treatment violates section 15 of the Charter and whether the UFCW has public interest standing to challenge the policy. The motion to strike was dismissed as the application raised justiciable issues.

R. v. Hershey Canada Inc.

Class Action: EI Premium Reductions & Statutory Benefits

This is a procedural ruling in a class action lawsuit brought by employees against their employer, Hershey Canada Inc., regarding alleged non-compliance with statutory obligations to share Employment Insurance premium reductions. The Court of Appeal for Ontario held that the claim was not barred by issue estoppel or res judicata and that the court had jurisdiction to determine compliance, allowing the case to proceed to trial.

Minott v. O'Shanter Development Company Ltd.

Minott v. O'Shanter: 13 Months Notice for 11-Year Employee

This is an appeal from a wrongful dismissal decision involving a maintenance worker with 11 years of service who was dismissed at age 43. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's award of 13 months' notice, rejecting the employer's argument that a single day's absence constituted just cause and clarifying that issue estoppel did not bar the claim despite a prior Employment Insurance finding of misconduct.

S. v. Canada (Attorney General)

Unemployment Insurance Discrimination: Adoptive Parents Receive Fewer Benefits

A case addressing whether provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act that provide unequal benefits to adoptive parents compared to biological parents violate section 15(1) of the Charter. The court found the discriminatory provisions not justified under section 1 of the Charter and issued a declaration of invalidity for the affected sections.

S. v. Canada (Attorney General)

A constitutional law case challenging the validity of unemployment insurance provisions under the Charter of Rights, focusing on equality rights and the application of the limitation clause.

K. v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. et al.

Collective Agreement Disability Benefits Dispute

A labour and employment case involving a dispute over long-term disability benefits under a collective agreement. The employee alleged the employer violated the agreement by failing to provide benefits, while the employer argued it fulfilled its obligations by purchasing the insurance plan. The Ontario Labour Relations Board ruled in favor of the employer, and the case addresses whether the claim is governed by the collective agreement or is independent of it.

Re The Queen in right of Ontario and Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al.

Grievance Arbitration: Authority of Board to Award Interest and Higher Pay

A merits decision involving grievance arbitration under the Crown Employees Collective Bargaining Act, addressing whether the Grievance Settlement Board has authority to award interest on lost wages, order higher pay for substantial equivalence, and interpret 'remuneration' under the Unemployment Insurance Act.

P. v. Levesque Plywood Ltd.

P. v. Levesque: Deduction of Unemployment Benefits

The Court of Appeal for Ontario heard an appeal regarding the calculation of damages in a wrongful dismissal action. The central issue was whether unemployment insurance benefits received by the wrongfully dismissed employee should be deducted from the damages awarded against the employer. The court held that such damages are not 'remuneration' under the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971, and public policy prevents the employer from benefiting from the employee's insurance payments.

R. v. Reed Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Senior Employee Entitled to 12 Months Notice

A wrongful dismissal case involving a senior employee who was dismissed without cause and was entitled to 12 months’ notice. The court addressed whether the notice period offered was reasonable, whether unemployment insurance benefits should be deducted from damages, and whether expenses incurred in mitigation were recoverable.

S. v. Facit-Addo Canada Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Senior Salesman Awarded Nine Months Notice

A wrongful dismissal case involving a senior salesman employed for seven years who was terminated without cause. The plaintiff was awarded nine months’ notice based on age, length of service, and employment circumstances, with the Bardal factors applied. The case also addresses whether unemployment insurance benefits should be deducted from wrongful dismissal damages and whether pension contributions should be excluded from damages calculations.

G. v. Rockwell International of Canada Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Senior Engineer Awarded One Year Notice

A wrongful dismissal case involving a senior employee, a professional engineer earning $20,000 annually, who was terminated without written agreement or notice. The court determined one year’s notice was reasonable based on position, salary, age, and employer assurances, applying Bardal v. Globe & Mail Ltd. and Johnston v. Northwood Pulp Ltd. The case also addressed whether unemployment insurance benefits received during the notice period should be deducted from damages, with benefits deducted due to employer contributions, applying Parsons v. B.N.M. Laboratories Ltd.