4 total
Divisional Court sets aside fresh injunction and upholds dissolution of decade-old consent injunction due to delay.
The parties were involved in a long-standing dealership agreement that deteriorated over time.
The plaintiff originally obtained a consent interlocutory injunction preventing the defendant from terminating the agreement, which remained in place for nearly ten years without the matter proceeding to trial.
The defendant successfully moved to dissolve the injunction due to inordinate delay, but the plaintiff subsequently obtained a fresh interim injunction from a different judge after receiving a new termination notice.
On appeal, the Divisional Court upheld the dissolution of the original injunction, finding no reversible error.
However, the court allowed the defendant's appeal and set aside the fresh injunction, concluding that the motion judge made palpable and overriding errors and that the plaintiff failed to establish irreparable harm or that the balance of convenience favoured continuing the hostile business relationship.
Summary dismissal justified where manager's repeated dishonesty and conflict of interest fundamentally breached employment obligations.
The respondent, a 25-year employee of the appellant Board, was summarily dismissed for using his position to obtain a direct monetary benefit.
He had purchased computers at a discount from a registered employer and accepted a $1,000 payment from an employer representative, subsequently lying about these events during the employer's investigation.
The trial judge found the dismissal was wrongful and awarded 24 months' notice.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the action, finding the trial judge erred by failing to apply the correct legal standard from McKinley v. B.C. Tel and by not considering the full extent of the respondent's misconduct.
The Court held that the respondent's intentional and repeated dishonest acts constituted a fundamental breach of his employment obligations, justifying summary dismissal.
Commercial lease rent reduction clause only applied to tax increases resulting from specific assessment appeal.
The appellant landlord appealed a decision interpreting a commercial lease.
The motion judge held the tenant was entitled to a rent reduction for increases in real estate taxes and ordered a reference to determine the apportionment of snow removal costs.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal in part, finding the lease only protected the tenant from tax increases resulting from a specific 1998 assessment appeal, not from general rate increases.
However, the Court upheld the order for a reference regarding snow removal costs, finding the lease's audit clause did not preclude it.
Income replacement benefits reinstated; accident injuries and resulting chronic pain syndrome caused ongoing disability.
The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them, alleging his ongoing disability was due to a pre-existing congenital neck condition, degenerative changes, or self-limitation.
The arbitrator found that while the congenital condition was not caused by the accident, the accident injuries combined with the fear generated by the discovery of the condition led to a chronic pain syndrome.
The arbitrator rejected the insurer's video surveillance evidence as proof of ability to return to work and ordered the reinstatement of income replacement benefits.
