The Divisional Court recently upheld a decision of the Superior Court of Justice which held that a termination clause in an employment contract which complied with the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) failed to clearly rebut the presumption of entitlement to common law notice. The plaintiff was therefore owed reasonable notice. In Movati Athletic (Group)…
Tag: Termination of Employment
OMHRA Fall ECHO Newsletter Features Two Articles by Jessica Toldo
The Fall 2018 issue of OMHRA’s ECHO newsletter features two articles co-authored by Hicks Morley lawyer Jessica Toldo.
In the article “Considerations for Municipal Employers When Drafting Termination Clauses in Employment Contracts,” Jessica discusses the importance of municipal employers having a clear and well-crafted termination provision to minimize the risk that a reviewing court will find the clause to be unenforceable, should litigation arise and highlight five key considerations when drafting termination clauses in light of some important developments in the case law.
The second article authored by Jessica, “HRTO Determines Requiring Proof of Eligibility to Work in Canada on a Permanent Basis is Discriminatory,” reviews a recent case where the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario found that a pre-employment ‘permanence requirement’ was discriminatory on the basis of the applicant’s citizenship.
Recent ESA Cases of Note
In a significant decision rendered on September 19, 2018, Wood v. CTS of Canada Co., the Ontario Court of Appeal considered the Form 1, which is required under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) to be posted and filed in cases of mass termination.
Court of Appeal Upholds Cause Dismissal for Breach of Fiduciary Duty
In the case of Dunsmuir v. Royal Group, Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal recently upheld the cause termination of a Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of a publicly-traded company for breach of fiduciary duty. The employee had commenced a claim against the employer for wrongful dismissal and sought approximately $6.6 million in damages….
FTR Quarterly – Issue 10
In This Issue: 5 Key Things for Employers to Consider in Drafting Termination Clauses in Employment Contracts, What Is – and What Isn’t – Constructive Dismissal: An Update, FTRQ&A with John Kloosterman: Key Differences Between Canadian and U.S. Employment Law and much more!
Appeal Court Rules on Termination Clauses and Proper “Failsafe” Language
The differing interpretations by the courts of employment contract provisions which limit entitlements upon termination has caused considerable confusion of late. The Ontario Court of Appeal has rendered a helpful decision which may serve to lessen some of the confusion. The Court reversed a lower court decision and found that a clause in an employment…
Benefits Canada Publishes an Article by Thomas Agnew on Liability in Mass Terminations
Hicks Morley’s Thomas Agnew authored an article in Benefits Canada titled “Court Decision Warns Employers About Financial Liability in Mass Terminations.” Employers should proceed carefully when it comes to mass terminations. A recent court decision in Ontario found the employer’s failure to comply with the Employment Standards Act’s technical posting requirement for mass terminations meant that the notice of termination given prior to the date of the posting was void, exposing the company to potentially significant liability for that period.
Court Invalidates ESA-Only Termination Clause, Again
In King v DST Systems, the Ontario Superior Court again struck down an Employment Standard Act, 2000 (ESA)-only termination clause – this time for not mentioning benefits.
Appellate Court Finds Employee Entitled to Bonus Which Vested after the End of the Notice Period
In Bain v. UBS Securities Canada Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a lower court decision which awarded an employee who was dismissed without cause in February 2013 his bonus entitlements for 2012 and the first three months of 2013, as well as for the 18-month notice period. David Bain worked for UBS as…
HRTO Finds No Discrimination Where Use of Medical Marijuana at Worksite Breached Zero Tolerance Policy
In Aitchison v L & L Painting and Decorating Ltd., the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) found that an employer did not discriminate against the applicant when his employment was terminated for smoking marijuana while at work, which was contrary to the employer’s “zero tolerance” policy. The applicant was employed as a seasonal painter…