John R. Read

The appellant appealed the dismissal of its Superior Court action, which the motion judge had found to be an abuse of process for raising the same issues as an earlier Small Claims Court action.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that despite the appellant's contradictory affidavits, the legal issues in the two actions were not identical or substantially the same.

However, due to the appellant's inaccurate affidavit, costs of the appeal and the motion were awarded to the respondent.

The applicant union sought to set aside a representation vote held following the restructuring of the school board, alleging irregularities including inadequate posting of the notice of vote and locked doors at polling stations.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board declined to inquire into the allegations under section 23(19) of the Public Sector Labour Relations Transition Act, 1997.

The Board found that even if the allegations were true, the number of affected voters was too small to alter the outcome of the vote, and the results reflected the true wishes of the majority of the employees in the bargaining units.

The Ottawa Police Services Board applied to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services under section 39(4) of the Police Services Act to resolve a dispute with the City of Ottawa regarding the 1994 police budget.

The dispute centered on whether a 1993 budget surplus should be applied to Social Contract targets or used to cover retirement payouts.

The City brought a preliminary motion challenging the Commission's jurisdiction.

The Commission granted the motion and dismissed the application, finding that its jurisdiction under section 39(4) is limited to determining the adequacy of policing resources and estimates, not resolving contractual or funding source disputes.

The union filed an unfair labour practice complaint alleging that the court-appointed receiver and manager of a nursing home was a successor employer and bound by the collective agreement.

The receiver argued that its appointment did not constitute a disposition of the business.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board held that the receiver had virtually complete control over the nursing home's operations and assets, which amounted to a disposition within the broad meaning of 'sale' under section 64 of the Labour Relations Act.

The Board declared the receiver to be a successor employer.

The Ontario Public Service Employees Union applied for a declaration that the Ministry of Natural Resources' contract with two individuals to operate Fitzroy Provincial Park constituted a transfer of an undertaking under the Successor Rights (Crown Transfers) Act.

The Board found that the contractors were operating the park for their own account, assuming financial risks, and using the physical assets and similar jobs as formerly performed by Crown employees.

The Board concluded that the transaction was analogous to a lease or franchise and declared it a transfer of an undertaking from the Crown to an employer.