Federal Court Confirms “Family Status” Applies to Mother-in-Law

In Canada (Attorney-General) v. Hicks, the Federal Court held that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (“CHRT”) did not err when it found that Human Resources and Services Development Canada (“HRSDC”) discriminated against Mr. Hicks in refusing to approve expenses associated with maintaining temporary dual residences after a relocation from Halifax to Ottawa. After Mr. Hicks…

Raising the Bar – Ninth Edition

Dear Friends, Welcome to summer! We’re very pleased to bring you this pre-beach edition of Raising the Bar. In this edition, we’ll guide you through important recent decisions on topics ranging from offers to settle, to case management, to costs, to the question of when is enough discovery “enough”. We will also Shine a Light…

BCCA Affirms Order Requiring Google to Render Domains Unsearchable

Last Thursday, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia issued an important decision in Equustek Solutions Inc. v. Google Inc. about the power of a domestic court to make orders against non-party, internet “intermediaries” – in this case, search engine provider Google. The matter involved an order made to help a network hardware manufacturer enforce…

Courts Differ on Termination Provisions and Need for Future Compliance with ESA

Over the last few years, courts have been reluctant to enforce different “ESA only” termination provisions due to ambiguity. However, not all judges have taken the same position with respect to what constitutes an ambiguous termination provision. The following two cases offer differing views on termination provisions in employment contracts and future compliance with the…

(Yet Another) Ambiguous “ESA-only” Termination Provision Unenforceable

Another “ESA-only” termination provision in an employment contract has been found unenforceable by the Ontario Superior Court. In Howard v Benson Group, the Court decided that the termination provision providing only Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”) minimum entitlements was ambiguous; therefore, the common law applied and the plaintiff was entitled to reasonable notice of termination….

Claim Against Employer Arising out of Social Event Allowed to Proceed

The decision of K.L. v. 1163957799 Quebec Inc. raises a caution for employers when planning social events. The employer hosted an unstructured evening social event at a water park where employees had unrestricted access to alcohol. The plaintiff brought an action against the employer and a supervisor as a result of an alleged sexual assault…

SCC Clarifies Test for Qualifying as an Expert Witness

Expert evidence has been a hot topic in Canadian law recently. Following this trend, in White Burgess Langille Inman v. Abbott and Haliburton Co., the Supreme Court of Canada considered the duty owed by an expert witness to the court to be independent, impartial and unbiased. The Court clarified that where an expert is “unable”…

Termination Clause in Federal Employment Agreement Enforceable

The recent decision in Luney v. Day & Ross Inc. is good news for employers. The Plaintiff worked for an interprovincial trucking company subject to the Canada Labour Code (“Code”). The Defendant terminated the Plaintiff’s employment without cause and offered the Plaintiff a severance package that it asserted was consistent with the termination clause in…

Federal Court: Unjust Dismissal Complaint for Without Cause Termination Requires Evidentiary Hearing

In a recent decision, Sigloy v. DHL Express (Canada) Ltd., the Federal Court overturned the decision of an adjudicator which had granted an employer’s preliminary objection and dismissed a complaint of unjust dismissal for lack of jurisdiction because the complainant had been dismissed without cause. At the adjudication, the employer objected to the unjust dismissal…