The appellant lawyer hired the respondent as a junior associate.
After a few months, the respondent delivered a highly critical letter accusing the appellant of dishonesty and incompetence, leading to her summary dismissal.
The trial judge found the letter constituted just cause for termination.
The Divisional Court reversed, finding the trial judge failed to apply the contextual approach mandated by McKinley v. BC Tel.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the trial judgment, holding that the trial judge had properly examined the circumstances and nature of the conduct, and his factual findings were entitled to deference.
