In an important decision for all federally regulated employers, the Occupational Health and Safety Tribunal of Canada (OHSTC) released its first decision interpreting the new definition of “danger” under the Canada Labour Code (Code)…
Publication Name: Case In Point
Procedural Power of Courts Not Constrained by PIPEDA
In Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) does not interfere with the procedural powers of a court. The decision arose out of a situation in which past judicial interpretation and application of PIPEDA had impeded the ability of the…
Appellate Court Clarifies Use of Subsequent Conduct Evidence in Resolving Ambiguous Contract
In an important decision regarding the law of contractual interpretation, Shewchuk v. Blackmont Capital Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal considered when the subsequent conduct of parties can be considered in interpreting a contract made between those parties…
Appellate Court Refuses to Extend Time for Filing of Leave to Appeal: Case Lacked Merit
In Reid v College of Chiropractors of Ontario, the Ontario Court of Appeal recently reviewed the test for extending time to file leave to appeal. The Court dismissed the motion for an extension of time on the basis that the proposed appeal lacked merit. The decision provides a helpful summary of the test for extending…
Supreme Court Affirms Supremacy of Solicitor-Client Privilege
In Alberta (Information and Privacy Commissioner) v. University of Calgary, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada (with two justices partially concurring) affirmed that the University of Calgary was justified in its refusal to produce certain documents over which it had claimed solicitor-client privilege to the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta (Commissioner). The…
Don’t Rush to Summary Judgment!
The Court of Appeal has overturned a decision by a motion judge which allowed the plaintiffs’ wrongful dismissal actions to be decided by way of summary judgment motion. In Singh v. Concept Plastics Limited, the two plaintiffs were long-term former employees of Concept Plastics. Both brought motions to resolve their actions by way of summary…
Appellate Court Affirms the Importance of Clearly Drafted Minutes of Settlement
In a recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, RJM56 Investments Inc v Kurnik, the Court supported an employer’s reasonable conduct in withholding and remitting amounts owing to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in the face of ambiguous minutes of settlement, and in so doing emphasized the need for carefully drafted minutes of settlement….
First CASL Decision Invites Long-Desired Feeling of Normality
Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation is relatively new, onerous and far from elegant. Organizations have been weighing the risks the best they can – and in doing so have puzzled over how to account for CASL’s provision for penalties of up to $10 million. On October 26th, the CRTC issued a decision in which it held that a company…
What Nexus is Required to Establish a Tribunal’s Jurisdiction over Discriminatory Conduct Arising at a Workplace?
The Supreme Court of Canada will be delivering a decision likely to provide further clarity on the scope of the jurisdiction of British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal (Tribunal) to hear a complaint alleging discrimination regarding employment involving parties who work for different employers. On October 13, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada granted leave to…
Duty to Accommodate Does Not Extend to Permitting Excessive Employee Absenteeism
In Ontario Public Service Employees Union v Ontario (Children and Youth Services), the Divisional Court recently affirmed that an employer’s duty to accommodate does not extend to allowing an employee not to work, stating that the “purpose of the duty to accommodate is to allow employees to fulfill their employment duties, not to allow employees not…