Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered two companion decisions in which it clarified the scope and process of summary judgment motions. In the unanimous decision, the Supreme Court provides some much needed guidance to the legal profession on the proper use of summary judgment motions in what the Supreme Court recognizes is a changing…
Publication Name: Case In Point
Expanded OLRB Power to Consider Bill 168 Workplace Harassment Reprisal Complaints
Based on two decisions rendered late last month, the Ontario Labour Relations Board (“OLRB” or “Board”) has expanded the scope of the Board’s authority to consider complaints arising from the Bill 168 workplace harassment amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“OHSA” or “Act”). This moves away from the Board’s decision in Confortia v….
Decision of Private School Not Subject to Judicial Review
In an important decision on the reach of administrative law, the Court of Appeal for Ontario held that a private school’s decision to expel a student for smoking marijuana in his dorm room was not subject to judicial review by the courts. The private school, Appleby College, is incorporated by a Special Act of the…
Supreme Court of Canada Provides Clarity to the Deductibility of Income Replacement Benefits from Wrongful Dismissal Damages
The Supreme Court of Canada has provided some much needed clarity to the issue of the deductibility of income replacement benefits from wrongful dismissal damages in its long-awaited decision, IBM Canada Ltd. v. Waterman (“Waterman”). Justice Cromwell, writing for the majority of the Court, dealt with the deductibility of pension benefit payments in particular. Ultimately,…
SCC establishes framework for “preferability” analysis under CPA s. 5(1)(d)
The Supreme Court of Canada released a significant decision with respect to the s. 5(1)(d) “preferable procedure” criterion for certification of a proposed class action under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992 (“CPA”). The OSC investigated allegations that the appellant implemented measures that reduced, but failed to negate, harm associated with certain market timing activities engaged in by…
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Extends “Family Status” Protection to Care for Mother-in-Law
In a recent decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”), Hicks v. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, the Tribunal found that “family status” protection under the Canadian Human Rights Act (the “Act”) can extend to eldercare responsibilities for “in-laws.” The Complainant was employed by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (“HRSDC”) when…
Supreme Court of Canada Denies Leave to Appeal in Reduction of Retiree Benefits Case
Today, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) denied leave to appeal from a decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (“BCCA”) in Lacey v. Weyerhaeuser Company Limited. The case concerned changes to certain post-retirement benefits for retired salaried employees (“Retirees”) of Weyerhaeuser Company Limited (“Weyerhaeuser”), and a predecessor company. At issue were fully-funded post-retirement…
Ontario Court of Appeal Upholds Malicious Prosecution Finding Against Municipality, Reduces Punitive Damages
In a cautionary tale for employers, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has upheld a lower court decision which found a Township guilty of malicious prosecution in its actions relating to a dismissed employee. The quantum of punitive damages awarded is also a stark reminder that employee terminations must be conducted in a fair and…
Calf-Roping Fatality Case Ends in $275,000 Fine
The Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench has rendered a fine of $275,000 (including victim surcharge) against XI Technologies (“XI”) for its failure to ensure the safety of an employee who was fatally struck and injured while operating a faulty calf-roping machine which had been rented by the employer for use at a client event. This…
Privacy Rights and A Union’s Duty to Represent its Membership
Last week, a case that has significant labour relations and privacy implications was argued before the Supreme Court of Canada. At issue in Bernard v. Canada (Attorney General) is the appropriate balance between an individual’s privacy rights and a union’s right, and duty, to represent its membership. In other words, what employee personal information is…