Ontario Severance

Natural Justice — Ontario Employment Law

98 casesDecisions from 1951–2026

About Natural Justice

In Ontario employment law, "natural justice" refers to the fundamental legal principles that ensure fair procedural processes when decisions are made that affect a person's rights, privileges, or livelihood. While most commonly associated with administrative law—such as decisions made by government tribunals, the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB), or the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal (WSIAT)—principles of natural justice also heavily impact unionized environments, professional regulatory bodies, and certain institutional employers like universities or hospital boards.

At its core, natural justice relies on two main pillars. The first is the right to be heard, historically known as audi alteram partem. This means that before a formalized decision is made against you—such as being expelled from a union, losing your professional license, or having tenure denied—you have the right to know the allegations and evidence against you, and you must be given a meaningful opportunity to respond. The second pillar is the rule against bias, or nemo judex in causa sua. The person or committee making the decision must be impartial. If a fair-minded and informed person would conclude that the decision-maker was biased (known as a "reasonable apprehension of bias"), the process may be legally flawed.

It is important for workers to understand how natural justice applies to their specific employment relationship. If you work for a private company and are dismissed "without cause," your employer does not strictly owe you a hearing or a right to respond; they simply owe you proper notice or severance under the Employment Standards Act (ESA) and common law. However, in contexts involving administrative bodies, unions, or terminations for "just cause," a rigged internal investigation or a refusal to hear the employee's side of the story can severely undermine the employer's case or the tribunal's ruling.

Navigating administrative appeals or internal institutional governance is procedurally complex and highly sensitive to the exact circumstances of the event. Because challenging administrative or institutional decisions involves navigating strict legal tests and deadlines, having a legal professional review the specific procedures used in your situation is the most reliable way to determine if your rights were breached.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between natural justice and procedural fairness?

In modern Ontario law, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Historically, "natural justice" applied strictly to judicial or quasi-judicial bodies, while "procedural fairness" applied to broader administrative decisions. Today, courts recognize both as part of a general duty of fairness owed to individuals facing institutional decisions.

Does my private-sector boss have to follow natural justice before firing me?

If you are a non-unionized employee being fired "without cause," your employer generally does not have to provide a formal hearing or right to respond, so long as they pay your required severance. However, if they are alleging "just cause" for severe misconduct, denying you an opportunity to explain your side can seriously weaken their legal position.

What does "reasonable apprehension of bias" mean?

This legal standard asks whether an informed, reasonable, and right-minded person would think it is more likely than not that the decision-maker, whether consciously or unconsciously, would not decide fairly. It is a common ground for overturning an administrative decision.

How do principles of natural justice apply to union members?

Unions must adhere to natural justice when conducting internal discipline, such as removing an elected union executive or revoking a membership. The targeted member must be given clear notice of the rule they allegedly broke and a fair chance to defend themselves before an impartial committee.

How do I challenge a decision that ignored natural justice?

If a government tribunal or administrative board breached these principles, it is usually challenged through a process called Judicial Review. If the breach happened internally (like inside a university or union), you must often exhaust their internal appeal mechanisms first before involving the courts.

Is there a time limit to challenge a decision for lack of fairness?

Yes, administrative tribunals and internal appeals have incredibly strict deadlines. Under the Judicial Review Procedure Act, challenges to most tribunal decisions must be launched within 30 days. It is critical to get legal guidance immediately if you believe a decision was made unfairly.

Common Scenarios

  • A university faculty member is denied tenure by a review committee that includes a senior professor with a well-documented personal grudge against them, creating a clear reasonable apprehension of bias.
  • A regulated professional, such as an Ontario nurse or teacher, faces suspension of their license by their regulatory college after being given only 24 hours' notice of the hearing, leaving them no realistic time to prepare a defense.
  • An elected local union president is removed from their governing position by the union's national executive without ever being provided the specific details of the financial misconduct allegations against them.
  • A worker appealing a denial of employment insurance (EI) benefits discovers that the administrative decision-maker relied on a secret employer document that the worker was never shown or permitted to respond to.

What You Should Know

  • Always request the disclosure of all evidence, reports, and allegations in writing prior to any formal institutional meeting or disciplinary hearing so you know exactly what case you have to meet.
  • If you know a decision-maker or investigator has a conflict of interest or a bias against you, you must raise an objection on the record immediately; waiting until you lose the decision to bring it up can result in you waiving your right to challenge it.
  • Keep detailed, timestamped records of every time you asked to present evidence, call a witness, or read an internal report and were denied by the organization.
  • Because the legal process for Judicial Review and institutional appeals relies on rigid technical rules, evaluating your procedural fairness claim with a qualified employment or administrative lawyer promptly is essential.

Featured Cases

G. v. Windsor Police Service

2026 ONSC 532 (CanLII) · 2026-02-12

A judicial review application concerning the discipline of a police officer by the Windsor Police Service. The Divisional Court reviewed the Police Services Commission's decision regarding an unlawful or unnecessary exercise of authority and neglect of duty, ultimately dismissing the application and upholding the Commission's order for a new hearing.

administrative law employment law judicial review natural justice police discipline

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 793 v 1476247 Ontario Ltd.

2023 ONSC 3481 (CanLII) · 2023-06-09

Labour Relations: Final Offer Vote & Pattern Agreements

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board concerning collective bargaining in the construction industry. The Divisional Court examined whether the Board erred in law by requiring the union to object to a Minister's direction for a final offer vote, acted unreasonably in ordering the execution of a pattern-breaking agreement, and breached natural justice through its expedited process under section 100 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

collective bargaining construction industry judicial review labour relations natural justice

Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association v. Toronto Catholic District School Board

2020 ONSC 5953 (CanLII) · 2020-10-02

Labour Arbitration: Natural Justice and Functus Officio

This is a judicial review of a labour arbitration award involving the Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association and the Toronto Catholic District School Board. The Divisional Court examined whether the arbitrator breached natural justice by awarding damages without notice, whether the arbitrator was functus officio after issuing a final award, and whether the mitigation of damages calculation was reasonable.

damages functus officio labour arbitration mitigation natural justice

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre v. Aramark Canada Ltd.

2019 ONSC 4183 (CanLII) · 2019-07-19

Judicial Review: Third-Party Standing in Arbitration

This is a judicial review application by a hospital challenging an arbitration award that found its employer violated a collective agreement by contracting out patient food services. The hospital argued it was denied natural justice because it was not given notice of the arbitration hearing and that the award improperly affected its contractual rights with a third-party provider. The Divisional Court held that the hospital had only an indirect commercial interest and was not entitled to notice or participation in the grievance arbitration.

arbitration collective agreements judicial review labour relations natural justice

Labourers’ International Union of North America (Local 183) v Allied Construction Employees (United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (Local 1030))

2016 ONSC 745 (CanLII) · 2016-03-08

Judicial Review: Union Certification & Document Production

This is a judicial review of the Ontario Labour Relations Board's decision to certify a union as the bargaining agent for employees. The applicant union sought production of documents to support allegations of employer support for the certified union, but the Board denied the request. The Divisional Court reviewed whether the Board's denial breached natural justice and was reasonable under the standard of review.

board discretion judicial review labour relations natural justice union certification

Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada v Unifor, Local 3011

2015 ONSC 3748 (CanLII) · 2015-06-10

Judicial Review of Arbitrator's Jurisdiction in Job Classification Grievance

This is a judicial review application concerning an arbitrator's jurisdiction and procedural fairness in a labour dispute involving a job classification grievance. The applicant alleged the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by addressing job classification without adequate opportunity for evidence and argument, and by failing to bifurcate proceedings. The court also addressed the admissibility of affidavit evidence containing expert reports not before the original decision-maker.

arbitration judicial review labour relations natural justice procedural fairness

T. v. Labourers International Union of North America

2014 ONCA 839 (CanLII) · 2014-11-26

Judicial Review: Bias in Labour Relations Board Decision

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding an application dismissed for lack of labour relations purpose. The applicants alleged bias and a breach of natural justice, arguing that the Vice-Chair should have recused himself due to a prior professional relationship with one party. The Court of Appeal found no reasonable apprehension of bias and upheld the Vice-Chair's discretion to dismiss the application.

administrative law bias judicial review labour relations natural justice

A. v. United Food and Commercial Workers Canada (Local 175)

2013 ONSC 6208 (CanLII) · 2013-10-09

This is a judicial review application brought by an employee against their union regarding the union's handling of a grievance arbitration. The court addressed whether the employee had independent standing to challenge the arbitration award, whether the union breached its duty of fair representation by failing to provide an interpreter, and whether the union breached natural justice. The Divisional Court dismissed the judicial review, upholding the union's exclusive standing and finding no breach of the duty of fair representation.

duty of fair representation judicial review labour relations natural justice union standing

G. v. Anishinabek Police Service

2013 ONSC 1417 (CanLII) · 2013-03-06

Judicial Review: Police Officer Salary Reinstated Due to Procedural Unfairness

This is a judicial review of a Police Governing Authority's decision to extend the limitation period for serving a Notice of Hearing against a police officer. The Divisional Court found that the PGA breached procedural fairness by failing to provide notice and an opportunity to respond to the extension application. Consequently, the decision was quashed, and the officer was entitled to salary reinstatement for the period affected by the flawed decision.

judicial review labour relations natural justice procedural fairness salary reinstatement

H. v. Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Kingston, in Canada

2011 ONCA 728 (CanLII) · 2011-11-22

Priest Constructive Dismissal: Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction

This is an appeal from a procedural ruling regarding subject matter jurisdiction in a constructive dismissal claim brought by a Roman Catholic priest against the Archdiocese. The Court of Appeal addressed whether the Superior Court has jurisdiction over ecclesiastical disputes and whether the motion judge erred in making findings of fact on disputed issues.

constructive dismissal ecclesiastical disputes jurisdiction natural justice weber framework

Vale Inco Ltd. v. United Steel

2011 ONSC 5951 (CanLII) · 2011-10-07

Judicial Review: OLRB Procedural Fairness

This is a judicial review application brought by an employer challenging procedural fairness in ongoing proceedings before the Ontario Labour Relations Board. The employer alleged that mid-hearing rule changes created an imbalance by allowing the union to present oral evidence without time limits while restricting the employer. The Divisional Court reviewed the application, finding no real unfairness or denial of natural justice.

administrative law judicial review labour relations natural justice procedural fairness

National Automobile v. Pharma Plus Drugmarts Ltd.

2011 ONSC 4188 (CanLII) · 2011-10-04

Judicial Review: LRB Procedural Fairness & Related Employer

This is a judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Labour Relations Board regarding a related employer application involving the CAW union and Pharma Plus Drugmarts Ltd. The Divisional Court found that the Board breached procedural fairness by denying the union notice and participation, and by imposing an unreasonable direct interest requirement for standing. The Court also found the Board's grant of province-wide bargaining rights and its dismissal of a termination application to be unreasonable in part.

judicial review labour relations natural justice procedural fairness union certification

Toronto Transit Commission v. The Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 113

2011 ONSC 3604 (CanLII) · 2011-06-10

Judicial Review: Arbitrator's Holiday Pay Decision Set Aside

This is a judicial review of an arbitrator's decision regarding entitlement to statutory and designated holiday pay for employees on 'Inactive Status' receiving WSIB benefits. The Divisional Court set aside the original arbitrator's decision due to a lack of justification and intelligibility, specifically regarding the application of the Employment Standards Act formula.

collective agreements judicial review labour relations natural justice statutory holiday pay

Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union

2011 ONSC 358 (CanLII) · 2011-01-18

This is a judicial review proceeding concerning the admissibility of affidavit evidence in an application to challenge a labour arbitration award. The Divisional Court addressed whether an employer could introduce affidavit evidence to dispute the arbitrator's findings of fact and whether notes appended to the affidavit should be struck from the record.

admissibility of evidence affidavit judicial review labour arbitration natural justice

Tembec Enterprises Inc. v. United Steelworkers Iwa Council 1-1000

2009 CanLII 30451 (ON SCDC) · 2009-06-12

Judicial Review: Arbitrator's Severance Award Quashed

The Divisional Court reviewed an arbitrator's decision granting termination and severance pay to a union grievor. The court quashed the decision because the arbitrator breached natural justice by deciding the grievance on the basis of frustration provisions without notice to the parties, and provided inadequate reasons by failing to determine the precise date of termination.

collective agreements judicial review labour arbitration natural justice procedural fairness

142445 Ontario Limited (Utilities Kingston) v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 636

2009 CanLII 24643 (ON SCDC) · 2009-05-15

Judicial Review: Admissibility of Affidavit Evidence in Labour Arbitration

This is a judicial review proceeding concerning the admissibility of affidavit evidence in a labour arbitration context. The employer sought to review an arbitrator's decision regarding employee discipline, while the union moved to strike affidavit evidence containing notes of the arbitration hearing. The court applied the Keeprite test to determine if the affidavit evidence was admissible to show jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice.

affidavit evidence judicial review labour arbitration labour relations natural justice

M. v. A.

2008 CanLII 54971 (ON SCDC) · 2008-10-02

This is a judicial review of a tribunal's decision to deny an adjournment request in an employment standards proceeding. The Divisional Court upheld the tribunal's decision as reasonable, finding that the applicant failed to obtain necessary consent and documentation, and that the tribunal acted within its discretion to balance the interests of the parties and statutory objectives.

adjournment employment standards judicial review natural justice tribunal discretion

J. v. Ontario Public Service Employees Union

2008 CanLII 17561 (ON SC) · 2008-04-24

A labour law case concerning the principles of natural justice in the context of the Labour Relations Act and public service employment.

labour relations natural justice public service union duties

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1739 v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

2007 CanLII 65617 (ON SCDC) · 2007-06-22

Judicial Review: LRB Rule 41 Consultation Upheld

This is a judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision concerning a labour dispute over the reassignment of jurisdiction between two local unions. The Divisional Court upheld the Board's use of expedited consultation proceedings under Rule 41, finding that the Board did not deny natural justice, acted within its rule-making authority, and provided sufficient reasons and evidence-based findings.

administrative law judicial review labour relations natural justice procedural fairness

Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association v. Toronto Catholic District School Board

2007 CanLII 6454 (ON SCDC) · 2007-03-05

Judicial Review of Teacher Termination Arbitration

This is a judicial review proceeding concerning the termination of a teacher by the Toronto Catholic District School Board following an arbitration award. The Divisional Court addressed whether the arbitrator's findings breached natural justice and whether affidavit evidence could be admitted to supplement the arbitration record. The court struck the affidavit evidence, deeming the judicial review premature as the arbitration process was incomplete.

arbitration evidence judicial review labour relations natural justice