A recent decision underscores the importance of complying with contractual termination entitlements for departing employees. In this Case in Point, Hicks Morley’s Justin Choy examines the decision and what it means for employers.
Practice Area: Litigation
Employee’s $76,000 Claim for Vested Stock Units Barred by Wrongful Dismissal Settlement and Release
Settlement agreements require careful attention to both present and future entitlements, as highlighted by the Ontario Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Preston v. Cervus Equipment Corporation. The Court held that the scope of an executed release, indemnity and minutes of settlement (the Settlement Documents) precluded an employee’s subsequent claim to vested stock units, despite…
Ontario Court Concludes Bank Employee’s Misconduct Amounted to Just Cause for Termination
On July 23, 2024, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released its decision in Arora v ICICI Bank of Canada, a wrongful dismissal claim filed by a former employee of ICICI Bank of Canada (Bank) terminated for cause. The Court dismissed the case, finding that the plaintiff’s conduct breached his duties of loyalty and good…
Ontario Court Orders Defence Medical Examination of Terminated Employee Alleging Inability to Mitigate
In Marshall v Mercantile Exchange Corporation, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted an employer’s motion for a defence medical examination of a former employee who claimed an inability to mitigate their damages due to a mental health condition. This decision makes clear that in appropriate cases, a defendant in a wrongful dismissal lawsuit will…
Supreme Court of Canada Addresses Workplace Privacy Rights in Ontario Schools
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its decision in York Region District School Board v. Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario. The decision establishes that Ontario school boards are “government”—and thus subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter)—and provides guidance on how alleged breaches of an employee’s Charter-based right…
Ontario Court Approves Modest $62,000 Settlement in Employee Misclassification Class Action
In Morris v. Solar Brokers Canada Corp., the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved a negotiated settlement of $62,000 in a class action arising from the alleged misclassification of individuals as independent contractors. The Court also approved class counsel fees in the amount of $20,000, leaving $42,000 to be distributed amongst the class. As a…
Ontario Court Grants Injunction to End Encampment at University of Toronto
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has granted an interlocutory injunction to end an encampment on the University of Toronto’s Front Campus. The Court found that the University’s Governing Council, as the property owner, has the ultimate right to determine the land’s use. In obiter, the Court also reiterated that the Charter does not apply…
Federal Court Issues Updated Notice Regarding the Use of AI in Court Proceedings
In light of the increasing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the legal profession, the Federal Court has issued an updated notice regarding the use of AI in Court proceedings (Notice). The Notice implements procedural safeguards for the use of AI in legal proceedings and imposes certain duties on counsel with respect to AI use….
Court Stays Employee Misclassification Class Action in Favour of Arbitration
In Wasylyk v. Lyft, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued a stay of a proposed employee misclassification class action in favour of private arbitration. The case provides an illustration of the factors that may support the enforceability of an arbitration clause in disputes related to the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA). The plaintiff filed…
Court Certifies Class Action Relating to Improper Access of Medical Files
In Welshman v. Central Regional Health Authority, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Court) certified a class action in which the plaintiffs alleged that employees of the defendant, the Central Regional Health Authority, improperly accessed the private personal and medical information of 260 individuals outside of the scope of their employment. The Court’s decision…