Personal Liability — Ontario Employment Law

B. v. B.

Common Employer Personal Liability & Punitive Damages

This appeal addressed whether a corporate director could be held personally liable as a 'common employer' for unpaid wages and whether punitive damages were appropriate for harsh and offensive conduct. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings that the appellant exercised personal control over employment and banking, characterizing payments as banked wages rather than loans, and confirmed the award of punitive damages and substantial indemnity costs.

T. v. Chair Source

Wrongful Dismissal: Individual Liability & Privity

This is an interlocutory proceeding involving a wrongful dismissal claim brought against both a corporate entity and an individual defendant. The court addressed whether lack of privity of contract precludes liability for the individual defendant and whether the proposed amendments to the statement of claim adequately pleaded the elements of intentional infliction of mental suffering. Leave to amend was granted to clarify claims, and costs were awarded to the plaintiff.

K. v. U.

This is a procedural ruling on a motion to strike pleadings in an action alleging fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of contract, and interference with contractual relations against an individual defendant. The court struck the statement of claim, finding that the defendant acted within the scope of employment, lacked privity of contract, and failed to plead an independent actionable wrong necessary for punitive damages.

W. v. Desjardins General Insurance Group Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: No Personal Liability for Employees

This is an interlocutory proceeding involving a motion to strike claims and a motion to amend pleadings. In the employment context, the court addressed whether individual employee defendants could be held personally liable for the employer's wrongful dismissal, ruling that there was no personal liability for actions within the scope of employment. The claims against these individuals were struck.

Ontario (Labour) v. New Mex Canada Inc.

Ontario (Labour) v. New Mex Canada - OHSA Sentencing

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a provincial offences appeal judge's decision on sentencing under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. The employee died from a fall at work. The trial justice of the peace imposed a $250,000 fine on the corporate employer and 25-day intermittent jail sentences on its two directors. The appeal judge varied these to a $50,000 corporate fine and $15,000 fines per director. The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal judge's sentences, finding the original sentences demonstrably unfit and based on an error in principle, while clarifying the role of moral blameworthiness and deterrence in regulatory sentencing.

T. v. N. et al

Common Employer Doctrine & Officer Liability for Wages

This case addresses whether the common employer doctrine applies to hold two corporations jointly liable for unpaid wages and whether a corporate officer can be held personally liable for those debts. The court found that common control and intermingling of operations justified applying the common employer doctrine and imposed joint and several liability on the officer to prevent abuse of the corporate structure. The court awarded $160,000 and $42,000 in unpaid wages but declined to extend successor liability to promissory notes.

C. v. DCL International Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: Personal Liability of Corporate Officers

This is an appeal from a motion to strike under Rule 21 of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure. The appellant, a former employee, alleged that the termination was a reprisal for a workplace injury claim and sought to hold individual corporate officers personally liable for wrongful dismissal and intentional torts. The Court of Appeal reviewed whether the motion judge correctly applied the standard for striking a claim for lacking a reasonable cause of action.

B. v The Centre for Spanish Speaking Peoples

This is a procedural ruling on a motion to strike pleadings in an employment-related action. The court addressed claims against individual employees, including lawyers, for actions taken in the course of employment, finding that personal liability is limited to circumstances involving fraud, dishonesty, or tortious conduct.

T. v. University of Western Ontario

Medical Resident Tort Claims Against University Faculty

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision striking out the plaintiff's claims. The plaintiff was dismissed from a medical residency programme and sued the university and individual faculty members for various torts. The motion judge struck out the entire statement of claim against the individual respondents and the claim of intimidation against the university, and refused to grant leave to amend. This court decided to allow the appeal in part to grant the plaintiff leave to amend her statement of claim because the motion judge gave no reasons for denying it.

H.S.C. Aggregates Ltd. v. M.

This is a summary judgment motion involving a dispute over personal liability for a loan agreement and a defense of constructive dismissal. The court applied Hryniak v. Mauldin principles to determine if a trial was necessary, ultimately granting summary judgment as no genuine issues for trial were raised regarding the employment claim.

K. v. Niagara Falls Taxi Ltd. (502909 Ontario Limited)

Dependent Contractor: Directors Not Personally Liable for Termination

This appeal addressed whether individual directors and officers of a taxi company could be held personally liable for the breach of contract resulting from the termination of dependent contractor taxi drivers without notice. The Court of Appeal held that individual defendants were not parties to the contracts and were shielded from liability for inducing breach of contract or intentional interference with economic relations. The court set aside costs previously awarded against the individual defendants and awarded costs of the appeal to the defendants.

R. v. E.

R. v. E.: Court of Appeal Reinstates Claims

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision to strike claims against the individual defendant and an unjust enrichment claim against all defendants. The employee had claimed breach of contract, misrepresentation, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment, along with statutory claims, regarding an unpaid retroactive salary. The motion judge struck all claims against the individual defendant and the unjust enrichment claim. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, reinstating the statutory, breach of contract, and misrepresentation claims against the individual defendant, and the unjust enrichment claim against the corporate defendants.

G. v. 1162540 Ontario Inc.

Constructive Dismissal Appeal: 12 Months Notice

This appeal from a Small Claims Court decision addressed whether the Deputy Judge erred in finding the plaintiff was constructively dismissed due to withholding of wages and anticipatory breach. The Divisional Court reviewed the finding of constructive dismissal and the 12-month notice period, and the judgment against the individual defendant for personal liability.

R. v. Media Experts M.H.S. Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: Limitation Clause Extends to Officer

This appeal concerned a wrongful dismissal claim where the plaintiff sought to hold a personal respondent, an officer of the corporate employer, liable despite a limitation of liability clause in the employment contract. The Court of Appeal applied the London Drugs test to determine if the clause extended to the officer, finding that both requirements were satisfied and the clause was not ambiguous. The appeal was dismissed, confirming that the clause protected the personal respondent from liability.

Ontario Human Rights Commission v. F.

Judicial Review: Personal Liability for Workplace Discrimination

This is a judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal decision concerning workplace discrimination and a poisoned work environment. The Divisional Court set aside the Tribunal's decision not to impose personal liability on individual respondents, finding the decision unreasonable, and addressed whether the matter should be remitted or if the court should impose its own remedial order.

R. v. Media Experts M.H.S. Inc.

Exclusion Clauses & Individual Liability in Employment

This is an interlocutory motion to strike pleadings in a wrongful dismissal and tort action. The court addressed whether exclusion clauses in the plaintiff's employment agreement extended to individual defendants, shielding them from tort claims such as intentional and negligent infliction of nervous shock arising from the termination. Applying the principles from London Drugs Ltd. v. Kuehne & Nagel International Ltd., the court held that the exclusion clauses did protect the individual defendants acting within the scope of their employment, and struck the tort claims as having no reasonable prospect of success.

S. -and- St. Clair College

Wrongful Dismissal and Human Rights Code: Accommodation and Personal Liability

A wrongful dismissal case where the plaintiff alleged failure to accommodate a medical condition under the Human Rights Code. The court addressed whether a claim under section 46.1 of the Human Rights Code can be advanced alongside a wrongful dismissal claim, and whether corporate officers can be personally liable for tortious conduct or breach of contract under the Code.

M. v. Boulder City Climbing School Inc.

Employment Contract: Bonus Clause & Personal Liability Appeal

This is an appeal from a trial decision in an employment contract dispute concerning the interpretation of a bonus clause, unpaid salary, and expenses. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's interpretation of the bonus clause and the award of $8,301 in damages, while also affirming the personal liability of a corporate officer for the amounts owing.

D. v. The Regional Group of Companies Inc.

Employment Contract: Post-Termination Profits & Personal Liability

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a trial judge's decision concerning an employee's entitlement to post-termination commission and the personal liability of a corporate president. The employee sued the corporate employer and its president for a 50% commission on a real estate project under his employment contract. The trial judge awarded the employee 50% of the $1,000,000 profit earned on the project and held the president personally liable. The Court of Appeal allowed the employer's appeal in part, ruling that the employer was only liable to pay commission on profits earned by the president's own entities and family, not third-party investors. The Court of Appeal allowed the president's appeal, dismissing the action against him because there was no legal basis to hold him personally liable for the employer's breach of contract.

ADGA Systems International Ltd. v. Valcom Ltd.

Can Corporate Officers Be Liable for Recruiting Torts?

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a Divisional Court decision in an action for inducing breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiff alleged that a competitor company, its director, and two senior employees recruited almost all of its technical staff to secure a government contract. The individual defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the claims against them personally, which was dismissed by the motion judge but allowed by the Divisional Court on the basis that they were acting in their employer's interest. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the dismissal of the summary judgment motion, ruling that corporate directors and employees can be personally liable for intentional torts committed while acting in the perceived best interests of their corporation.