Kevin Wisnicki

The plaintiff brought a motion for default judgment against the defendant employer for wrongful dismissal and unpaid profits.

The defendant was noted in default and deemed to admit the allegations in the statement of claim.

The court awarded the plaintiff nine months' reasonable notice, his share of business profits subject to a 25% contingency deduction, and $10,000 in moral damages due to the defendant's harassing conduct and unsubstantiated allegations of cause.

The plaintiff, Patrick Ojo, brought a motion for summary judgment against his former employer, Crystal Claire Cosmetics Inc., regarding his termination without cause.

The key issues were the enforceability of the employment agreement's termination clause, the reasonable notice period if unenforceable, mitigation of damages, and entitlement to a pro-rated bonus.

The court found the termination clause unenforceable due to non-compliance with the Employment Standards Act, 2000, specifically regarding "just cause for summary dismissal" and continuation of benefits.

The court awarded the plaintiff three months' common law reasonable notice and found he had adequately mitigated his damages.

However, the claim for a pro-rated bonus was dismissed due to lack of contractual entitlement and insufficient evidence.

Following the successful dismissal of the defendant's counterclaim under the anti-SLAPP provisions of the Courts of Justice Act, the plaintiff sought damages under s. 137.1(9) and full indemnity costs under s. 137.1(7).

The court dismissed the claim for damages, finding no evidence that the counterclaim was brought in bad faith or for an improper purpose.

The court awarded costs of $95,173.26, noting that while full indemnity costs are presumptive, the awarded amount was fair and proportionate given that the main action was continuing and some work would be useful in that proceeding.

The applicant, Medha Joshi, brought a motion under Ontario's anti-SLAPP legislation (s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act) to dismiss a $700,000 counterclaim by Allstate Insurance Company of Canada.

Joshi's initial claim was for wrongful dismissal, alleging discriminatory insurance practices by Allstate against residents of Brampton, primarily visible minorities, which she had publicly discussed.

The court found that Joshi's expressions related to a matter of public interest.

Allstate failed to satisfy the court that its counterclaim had substantial merit or that Joshi had no valid defence, particularly regarding the absence of malice for malicious falsehood and the availability of absolute, qualified, and fair comment privileges for defamation.

Allstate also failed to demonstrate sufficiently serious harm.

Consequently, the motion was granted, and Allstate's counterclaim was dismissed as a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

The plaintiff landlord moved for summary judgment for unpaid rent under a commercial lease.

The defendant tenant argued that the notice of default was insufficient and that the landlord's re-entry by changing the locks amounted to forfeiture rather than distraint.

The court found that actual notice was received via email and fax, satisfying the notice requirement.

The court also held that the re-entry was a proper distraint, as the landlord clearly communicated its intent to distrain and offered reasonable access to the premises.

However, the court found a genuine issue requiring a trial regarding the calculation of additional rent damages.