The Court of Appeal for Ontario has affirmed that if restrictive covenants are to be enforceable, they must be properly drafted. In Eagle Professional Resources Inc. v. MacMullin, the Court upheld the finding of a motion judge that “non-competition” clauses in the employment contracts of employees who left the plaintiff’s employ and joined a competitor…
Practice Area: Litigation
Ontario Court of Appeal Decision Underscores Importance of Properly Drafted Restrictive Covenants
A recent decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario reinforces the importance of carefully drafting restrictive covenants and considering what evidence is necessary to succeed on a summary judgment motion. The claim arose when individual employees left their employer to work for a competitor. The former employees were all subject to the same “non-competition”…
Court of Appeal Upholds Termination of Employee for Driving Company Vehicle While Intoxicated
In Dziecielski v. Lighting Dimensions, the Court of Appeal for Ontario recently upheld an employer’s decision to terminate a long-service employee with an otherwise clean disciplinary record for driving a company vehicle while intoxicated. While driving, the employee had been involved in a car accident and was criminally charged. The lower court had examined the…
No Damages Awarded For Failure to Mitigate By Declining Job with Former Employer
In a recent decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Chevalier v. Active Tire & Auto Centre Inc., the Court upheld a trial judge’s finding that an employee who refused an offer of re-employment with his former employer was not entitled to damages: there was no evidence that had he returned to that workplace,…
Supreme Court of Canada to Determine Whether Charter Protects Right to Strike
The Supreme Court of Canada will decide whether the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”) guarantees the right to strike for unions and their members. Earlier this year, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal found that the Charter does not protect the right to strike. A substantial component of the Court of Appeal’s decision…
Section 46.1 Code Damages Awarded by Court
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently awarded damages under section 46.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, a section added to the Code in 2008 to permit courts to award damages for violations of the Code. Wilson v. Solis Mexican Foods appears to be the first decision in which such damages have been ordered…
Ontario Court Awards Damages under Human Rights Code
In what appears to be the first decision under s. 46.1 of the Ontario Human Rights Code (“Code”), which permits courts to award damages for violations of Code rights, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has awarded damages for infringement of Code rights in an amount of $20,000. (Prior to the changes enacted to the…
Is Drinking and Driving Cause for Dismissal?
In some circumstances, yes. In the recent decision of Dziecielski v. Lighting Dimensions Inc., the employee drove a company vehicle while intoxicated. He was returning to the workplace from a customer visit and a lunch where he drank four beers, when he was involved in a car accident which destroyed the vehicle and left him…
Court Weighs in on Mitigation and Returning to Work with Former Employer
The Court of Appeal for Ontario has upheld a lower court decision which found the plaintiff (Mr. Chevalier), who had been constructively dismissed, was not entitled to damages after he declined an offer of re-employment from his former employer. It held that the trial judge had properly considered and applied the legal principles, concluding on…
The Latest Word on Restrictive Covenants from the Supreme Court of Canada
The law on restrictive covenants is all about context. Restrictive covenants typically arise in a sale of a business agreement or an employment contract. If you are drafting a restrictive covenant or determining whether a covenant is enforceable, you must be aware of the context because the applicable legal principles vary based on the context….