The applicant employer sought judicial review of an arbitration award which held that, although the employer had the authority to change the pension plan under the collective agreement, it was estopped from freezing the Defined Benefits component until the expiry of the agreement.
The arbitrator found the employer made a clear representation in 1999 that employees choosing the Defined Benefits plan would remain in it until retirement, and the union detrimentally relied on this by losing the opportunity to negotiate protections.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the arbitrator's application of the doctrine of estoppel and his factual findings were reasonable and entitled to deference.
