3 total
The court stayed an action for economic torts arising from a construction work stoppage, deferring to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Ontario Labour Relations Board.
The plaintiff, EllisDon Residential Inc., sought an injunction against Limen Group Const. (2019) Ltd. to resume work and against Defendant Unions for inducing breach of contract and interfering with economic relations.
The defendants argued the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) had exclusive jurisdiction over the dispute.
The court applied the Weber test, finding the essential character of the dispute related to labour relations and the interpretation of collective agreements, falling within the OLRB's exclusive jurisdiction.
The court dismissed the injunction motion and stayed the action, deferring to the OLRB.
Human rights application deferred pending resolution of concurrent union grievance raising the same issues.
The respondents requested the deferral of a human rights application alleging discrimination based on disability, pending the resolution of a concurrent grievance filed by the applicant's union.
The Tribunal found that the grievance raised essentially the same issues as the application.
In accordance with its normal practice regarding concurrent proceedings under a collective agreement, the Tribunal deferred the application pending the completion of the grievance process.
Human rights application dismissed for delay; reliance on union grievance process did not constitute good faith.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability, nearly 22 months after the last alleged incident.
The applicant argued that the delay was justified because she was relying on her union to address the issue through the grievance process.
The Tribunal found that waiting for other legal proceedings to conclude does not generally constitute a valid explanation for delay.
The Tribunal held that the applicant failed to establish that the delay was incurred in good faith and dismissed the application as being outside its jurisdiction under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.
