In Covenoho v Pendylum Ltd., the Court of Appeal for Ontario quashed a lower court decision upholding the without cause termination of an employee under a fixed-term contract, and awarded her damages for the remainder of the term. The employer, Pendylum Ltd., entered into a contract with the employee which stated that she was to […]
Bird Richard is centrally located in Ottawa and serves clients nationally. Our clients range from large Crown Corporations with national operations to small local construction firms. We also provide services to corporations in Alberta, in the Northwest Territories and in Nunavut.
Entries by BirdRichard
Further to last May’s final report of the Changing Workplaces Review, the provincial government has announced its intent to implement measures to modify employment standards, including: • Raising Ontario’s general minimum wage to $14 per hour on January 1, 2018, and to $15 on January 1, 2019, followed by annual increases at the rate of […]
In Fillmore v Hercules SLR Inc., the Court of Appeal for Ontario determined that a terminated employee does not have to mitigate his damages upon termination by returning to work for the same employer in a new full time position at less compensation. In this case, the employee, Roy Fillmore, was terminated by his employer, […]
In our summer 2016 issue, we discussed an appeal underway in Brake v PJ-M2R Restaurant Inc. The central issues were whether the Employer, a McDonald’s franchise, had cause to dismiss the Plaintiff, Ms. Brake, and whether her mitigation income ought to have been offset against her damages award. On May 23, 2017, the Court of […]
In a wrongful dismissal action, employers will not be held liable for damages during the notice period if they can establish that an employee failed to reasonably mitigate her damages. To succeed, the employer must prove i) that the employee did not take any steps (or at least reasonable steps) to search for comparable employment […]
In its long awaited decision in Wood v Fred Deeley Imports Ltd., 2017 ONCA 158, the Court of Appeal for Ontario struck down the following termination clause, finding that it constituted an attempt to “contract out” of the Employment Standards Act, 2000: [The Company] is entitled to terminate your employment at any time without cause […]
In our summer 2016 edition of EMPLAWYERS’ Update, we reported on Oudin v Centre Francophone de Toronto, in which the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a termination clause, despite finding that some of its provisions violated the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”). On February 2, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the employee’s Application […]
In Walker v Hulse, Playfair and McGarry, 2017 ONSC 358, the Ontario Divisional Court set aside an award of aggravated damages stemming from a wrongful dismissal lawsuit brought in the Small Claims Court. In December 23, 2013, the Plaintiff was suspended with pay while the employer, a local funeral home, conducted an investigation into inappropriate […]
In 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada considered whether a partnership agreement constituted protected “employment” pursuant to the British Columbia Human Rights Code in McCormick v Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP. The Supreme Court ruled that a partnership was not “employment” and dismissed the case. On March 28, 2017, the Supreme Court will once again have […]
In Bovin et al v Over the Rainbow Packaging Services Inc., 2017 ONSC 1143, the Superior Court of Justice sent a clear warning to employers who employ bad faith tactics aimed at forcing employees to quit. Ms. Bovin and Ms. Sidhu began their employment with the Defendant, a packaging company, in 1997. Ms. Bovin was […]
508-130 Albert St,
Before you send an e-mail to Bird Richard, please be aware that your communications with us through this message will not create a lawyer-client relationship with us. Do not send us any information that you or anyone else considers to be confidential or secret unless we have first agreed to be your lawyers in that matter. Any information you send us before we agree to be your lawyers cannot be protected from disclosure.