Laurent Roy

The appellant company dismissed an employee for chronic absenteeism caused by alcoholism.

The employee subsequently underwent successful treatment.

The arbitrator found the dismissal was justified at the time it was made, but relied on the subsequent successful treatment to annul the dismissal and reinstate the employee.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the arbitrator exceeded his jurisdiction by relying on subsequent-event evidence to annul a dismissal that was justified at the time it was implemented.

The appeal was allowed and the arbitrator's decision was quashed.

The respondents were promoted to foremen and left the bargaining unit, but later returned to it.

Upon their return, their seniority was calculated under the less generous terms of the new collective agreement rather than the one in effect when they were promoted.

They sought a declaratory judgment in the Superior Court to restore their seniority.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction, as the dispute involved the application and interpretation of the current collective agreement, which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of a grievance arbitrator.