Andy Pushalik

The plaintiff employee was terminated without cause and the employer refused to pay her contractual two weeks' severance unless she signed a full and final release.

The plaintiff sued for wrongful dismissal, arguing the employer repudiated the employment contract and that the termination provisions violated the Employment Standards Act.

The court found that the employer's demand for a release in exchange for contractual entitlements constituted a repudiation of the contract, entitling the plaintiff to common law reasonable notice.

The court awarded 6 months' notice, totaling $16,807.52 in damages.

The Canadian National Railway Company sought a 30-day extension of a without-notice injunction previously granted to prevent protesters from trespassing on or blocking its Brampton Intermodal Hub facility.

The court had initially granted a 10-day injunction due to apprehended harm.

Despite a lack of actual trespass or blockade in the preceding week, new evidence indicated a significant, organized protest was imminent.

The court acknowledged the exceptional circumstances, including the global pandemic and societal upheaval, but emphasized the fundamental rights to expression and protest.

Applying Rule 40.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court found that an extension without notice could only be for an additional ten days and required exceptional circumstances.

Balancing the need to protect private rights with preserving freedom of expression, the court limited the injunction extension to ten days and mandated a further hearing on notice to the affected parties, stressing that injunctions should minimally impair rights.

Canadian National Railway Company (CN) sought an injunction to prevent unnamed protesters from trespassing on its lands and blockading its trains at its Brampton intermodal terminal.

Protesters had previously caused significant delays and safety risks while expressing outrage over police brutality.

The court granted the injunction, affirming that while freedom of expression is a Charter right, it does not extend to unlawful acts such as trespassing, endangering others, or disrupting legitimate business operations.

The court applied the three-part test for an interim injunction, finding a strong case for CN, irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience favoring the railway.

An employee who began working for a predecessor company in 1995 with an arrangement to work from home three days per week was informed in January 2017 that she could no longer work from home effective March 1, 2017.

The employee took the position that she had been constructively dismissed.

The motion judge found constructive dismissal based on two grounds: the breach of an essential term regarding work-from-home arrangements and the arbitrary setting of the employee's fourth quarter 2016 bonus.

The motion judge awarded 20.5 months of salary (less a 10% contingency), compensation for the underpaid bonus, and lost benefits.

The employer appealed; the employee cross-appealed regarding bonus entitlements during the notice period.

The plaintiff brought a summary judgment motion claiming constructive dismissal after 22 years of service.

Following a corporate acquisition, the defendant unilaterally revoked the plaintiff's long-standing arrangement to work from home three days a week, placed her on a performance improvement plan, and arbitrarily reduced her bonus.

The court found that the ability to work from home was an essential term of the employment contract and its unilateral removal, along with the bonus reduction, constituted constructive dismissal.

The plaintiff was awarded damages based on a 22-month notice period, subject to minor deductions, plus compensation for the underpaid bonus.