Wrongful dismissal — Ontario Employment Law

P. v. Sky Service F.B.O. Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: Appeal Dismissed as Statute-Barred

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.

B. et al. v. Guycan Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Employee Status and Unpaid Commissions

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.

K. v. Crossbridge Condominium Services Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Successor Liability & Notice Appeal

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.

A. v. The Chiefs of Ontario

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.

H. v. 1359768 Ontario Inc. (B&B Towing)

Wrongful Dismissal: Frustration & Company Asset Damages

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.

W. v. Facebook Canada Ltd.

Facebook Canada Wrongful Dismissal: 10 Months Notice Awarded

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.

C. v. Grand Cheese

Wrongful Dismissal: Senior Executive Awarded 27 Months Notice

This is a default judgment ruling in a wrongful dismissal case involving a senior executive with lengthy service who was constructively dismissed without just cause. The court established liability based on deemed admissions and applied the Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. principle regarding benefits continuity. The plaintiff was awarded twenty-seven months' pay in lieu of reasonable notice with benefits, along with partial indemnity costs and interest.

B.A.C. v. Automobile Specialties Inc. et al

Constructive Dismissal: Common Employer Liability & Bad Faith Damages

This is a default judgment case involving wrongful and constructive dismissal claims against an employer and related entities. The court found the defendants liable under the common employer doctrine and awarded damages for constructive dismissal, including unpaid wages, eight weeks of termination pay, and additional damages for bad faith conduct.

S. v. Royal Bank of Canada

S. v RBC: 16 Months Notice for Wrongful Dismissal

This wrongful dismissal case involved a financial planner terminated for alleged cause, which the court set aside after finding the employer's investigation inadequate and biased. The court awarded sixteen months' reasonable notice and damages for aggravated mental distress and bad faith in the manner of dismissal, while rejecting the employer's mitigation defence.

W. v. Olympic Wholesale

Wrongful Dismissal: 19 Months' Notice Plus 14 for Bad Faith

This wrongful dismissal case addressed whether a supervisor's long-standing practice of 'topping up' hours constituted just cause for termination under the ESA. The court found just cause was not established and determined reasonable notice based on the Bardal factors for a 55-year-old employee with 17 years of service. The court fixed reasonable notice at 19 months and extended it by 14 months because bad faith in the manner of dismissal impaired the search for new work.

S. v. Sleep Country Canada Inc.

Wrongful Dismissal: Mitigation Production Order

This is a procedural case management decision in a wrongful dismissal action involving Sleep Country Canada Inc. The court addressed motions regarding non-compliance with documentary production, specifically focusing on the adequacy of mitigation records and the permissibility of rolling productions. The motion to strike the action was dismissed, but the court ordered further examinations and imposed a strict production timetable, reserving costs.

M. v. Bison Transport Inc.

M. v. Bison Transport: Drug Policy Termination

This wrongful dismissal case involved an employee terminated for cause following a second positive drug test, raising issues regarding safety-sensitive policies, human rights accommodation, and the justification of dismissal. The court found the termination justified due to consistent policy enforcement and lack of disability, dismissing the wrongful dismissal claim. The court assessed four months' notice only in the alternative, and dismissed overtime claims as barred by limitation periods or unsupported by evidence.

Peninsula Employment Services Ltd v. C.

Peninsula Employment Services v. C.: Settlement Disclosure

This is an appeal from a motion judge's decision regarding abuse of process and remedies for non-disclosure of settlement agreements. The Court of Appeal set aside the lower court's rigid application of the Handley Estate doctrine and the imposed stay of proceedings, remitting the matter for re-determination under current law which requires a case-specific assessment of actual prejudice.

K. v. GoEasy Ltd

Wrongful Dismissal: 8 Months Notice & Inducement Claim

This wrongful dismissal case addressed whether an employer induced a senior employee from secure prior employment to increase the reasonable notice period, ultimately dismissing the inducement claim. The court determined an eight-month notice period based on Bardal factors, including the employee's senior management role and the availability of similar employment. Additionally, the court awarded pro-rated short-term incentive plan (STIP) and long-term incentive plan (LTIP) compensation during the notice period but dismissed claims for bad faith, punitive, and moral damages.

S. v. K.

Real Estate Salesperson Employment Status Dismissed

This is a summary judgment decision addressing whether a real estate salesperson was an employee or dependent contractor of an individual broker rather than the brokerage. The court applied the Trust in Real Estate Services Act, finding the brokerage was the sole employer and private employment arrangements were unenforceable. Consequently, the plaintiff's wrongful dismissal and dependent contractor claims were dismissed due to lack of employer control and insufficient proof of economic dependency.

S. et al v. PuraVida Foods, Inc. et al

Wrongful Dismissal: Procedural Conversion & Consolidation

This is an interlocutory procedural decision regarding whether an application should be converted to an action and whether an oppression application should be consolidated with wrongful dismissal claims. The court refused conversion, finding no unresolvable credibility issues requiring a trial, and refused consolidation, distinguishing the central oppression issue from the separate wrongful dismissal claims.

K. v. W.C. Reid Distributor Ltd.

Wrongful Dismissal: Conversion to Action Motion

This is a procedural motion regarding whether an application concerning wrongful dismissal and human rights issues should be converted into a full trial action. The court applied the Collins Barrow test to determine if material facts were in dispute, concluding that issues such as mitigation and reasonable notice could be determined on an affidavit record. The motion to convert the application to an action was dismissed.

E.-F. v. Equine Canada et. al.

Wrongful Dismissal: 4 Months Notice for Short-Service Director

This is an interlocutory proceeding involving a wrongful dismissal claim where the plaintiff sought summary judgment on reasonable notice and LTD entitlement. The court applied the Hryniak v. Mauldin framework to determine if a trial was necessary. While the court acknowledged the Employment Standards Act minimums and considered the Bardal factors for notice, it refused summary judgment on the LTD claim due to credibility conflicts and the need for factual findings regarding policy interpretation.

A. v. IBM Canada Limited

Costs Awarded in Employment Dispute: $215,000 Substantial Indemnity

This is a procedural costs ruling in an employment dispute where the plaintiff was found to be presumptively entitled to costs due to overall success. The court awarded substantial indemnity costs of $215,000, citing the defendant's entrenched and legally incorrect positions and litigation conduct that unnecessarily lengthened the proceedings.

B. Estate v. 2113626 Ontario Inc., (Hampton Inn and Suites)

Common Employer Liability: Wrongful Dismissal Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in a wrongful dismissal action involving the 'common employer' doctrine. The motion judge had granted summary judgment against the corporate entities, finding they were jointly involved in running the hotel and shared a common intention to create an employment relationship with the deceased manager. The appellate court upheld the findings of fact and law, confirming the liability of the companies for the wrongful dismissal.