Menu
Call Us Today
416-616-5628
Blog

“Suitability” the standard for dismissal during probationary periods rules Ontario Divisional Court

By Uncategorized

In a recent case, the Ontario Divisional Court clarified the standard required for dismissal of employees during probationary periods. Employers are reminded that probationary periods are to serve as a time for determining the “suitability” of the employee for employment, but employers must be fair in their assessment. In Nagribianko v Select Wine Merchants Ltd., an employee started employment with Select Wine Merchants on a six-month probationary period and was dismissed just before the end of the trial period. The employee filed a wrongful dismissal suit. The Ontario Divisional Court held that the standard of dismissal for probationary employees is…

Read More

Recent Supreme Court of Canada Decision May Signal a Stronger Duty of Good Faith for Employers

By Uncategorized

In the recent case of Bhasin v. Hrynew the Supreme Court of Canada established a new duty of good faith that applies to all contracts, including employment contracts. This duty requires the parties to be honest with each other in regards to the performance of their contractual obligations. The court held that, while performing the contract, each party should have an “appropriate regard” to the legitimate interests of the other party. Further, the parties may not act in a manner which is arbitrary or capricious. This duty of good-faith dealing has been subsequently applied to the employment-dismissal context in Styles v. Alberta Investment…

Read More

Quebec Court holds that Good Business Reasons for terminating an Employee are not the same as “Serious Reasons” at Law

By Uncategorized

In a series of cases the Court of Quebec looked at the question of an employer’s justification of termination for “serious reasons’ and held that an employer’s legitimate business reasons are not the same as “serious reasons” at law. The two cases Corporatek Inc. v. Khouzham and Premier Tech Ltée v. Dollo stand for the principle that, in non-disciplinary cases, prior to terminating employment for a “serious reason,” an employer must first notify the employee of the risk of termination, explain the reasons for the decision, and allow the employee to address their shortcomings. This applies even if the employee…

Read More

Court of Appeal for Ontario Says Employer’s Financial Hardship Cannot Affect Reasonable Notice for Dismissal

By Uncategorized

The recent decision of Michela v. St. Thomas of Villanova Catholic School reaffirms that employers have an obligation to provide reasonable notice to employees, regardless of the employer’s financial circumstances. This obligation is not reduced when the employer faces financial hardship and, as such, economic hardship is not relevant to calculating the length of the reasonable notice period. The case was brought by a number of long-tenured teachers, who were notified of their termination at the end of a school year, due to apparent financial difficulties that the school was facing. The court affirmed that the length of a reasonable…

Read More

Employers must provide fresh consideration for new employment contracts entered during the employment period

By Uncategorized

In the recent case of Holland v. Hostopia.com Inc. the Court of Appeal for Ontario ruled that fresh consideration will be needed in order to enforce employment contracts signed mid-employment that introduce new material terms. Such situations often arise in cases like the one of Mr. Holland who, after several months of working with Hostopia, was presented with a new employment agreement that contained a new termination clause. This clause was not present in the initial agreement he signed when offered the position with the company. Several years later the employer relied on this clause to terminate Mr. Holland’s employment on a…

Read More

Ontario Court gives plaintiffs a novel means of enforcing their privacy rights

By Uncategorized

The advent of the Internet and social media, has introduced a myriad of new problems for privacy law, which has become an increasingly inadequate means of protecting people’s privacy rights. Fortunately, in the recent case of Doe 464533 v N.D. the court recognized this issue and decided to better align current privacy law with the modern state of technology, and as such give plaintiffs a novel means of punishing the breach of their privacy rights. In this case, a young woman decided to share a sexually explicit video of herself with her ex-boyfriend, who later posted the video on a…

Read More

Vegans argue that they deserve the protection of Ontario Human Rights Law

By Uncategorized

Both the legal community and the public are used to understanding Human Rights Law as protecting cultural, ethnic and religious affiliation, but vegan rights groups such as Animal Justice, are fighting to expand this definition and make veganism another protected human right’s ground. The current version of the policy on preventing discrimination based on creed of the Ontario Human Rights Commission reads: “Creed may also include non-religious belief systems, that like religion, substantially influence a person’s identity, worldview and way of life”. The vegan groups argue that the recent changes in the definition of the word “creed” suggest, that ethical…

Read More

Victim of Racial Profiling by Police obtains a $10,000 award of damages at the Human Rights Tribunal

By Uncategorized

The recent case of Joseph Briggs, a child and youth care student arbitrarily detained by the Durham police, in what the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has called a case of racial profiling, showcases the violations of human rights faced by minority individuals in the GTA, as well as the urgent need for reform of the policing culture in Ontario. Mr. Briggs, was detained after deciding to have a quick meal at his local Subway restaurant following a long study session when police officers decided to check the plates of his car with the police database and mistakenly believed that…

Read More

Quebec Human Rights Tribunal: Racist remarks towards tenants will not be tolerated

By Uncategorized

A recent decision of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal underscores the need for tenants to be treated equally and fairly by landlords, regardless of their religion and ethnicity. After fours years of constant harassment by the superintendent of the apartment building where he resided with his son, Mohamed Azzedine Tighrine finally obtained justice last week, with the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ordering a total of $13,000 in damages for discrimination on the basis of religion, sexuality and ethnicity. “He feels confused, belittled, humiliated and offended,” Judge Rosemarie Millar said in his judgment. For four years Mr. Tighrine has been subject…

Read More

Piercing the Corporate Veil, Personal Liability of Directors in Employment Contracts

By Uncategorized

In its recent decision, Mainieri v Kajotec Inc. et al., the Superior Court of Justice awarded an employee $25000 in damages after finding that he was induced to enter into an employment contract as a result of fraudulent misrepresentation by the corporation’s sole director, Joel Kaleu. FACTS Prior to hiring Mr. Mainieri, Kaleu informed the Plaintiff that his company was operating in the eco-products industry and selling various products listed on a website with corresponding patent numbers. Based on these representations, the Plaintiff entered into a six-month employment contract with a $30,000 salary. Shortly after, the Plaintiff found that Kajotec…

Read More
Scroll To Top