Madison Joan Chilvers

The proposed intervener coalition sought leave to intervene in an employment-contract appeal concerning enforceability of termination provisions.

The court held the coalition would provide a distinct perspective on the effects of termination clauses on vulnerable and low-wage workers and granted leave on terms aligned with a prior intervener order.

Two organizations, the Ontario Chamber of Commerce (OCC) and the Canadian Association of Counsel to Employers (CACE), brought motions for leave to intervene in an appeal concerning the enforceability of 'without cause' and 'with cause' termination provisions in an employment contract.

The respondent employee opposed the motions, arguing the appeal was a private dispute and intervention would cause duplication and imbalance.

The motion judge found the appeal raised broader public policy issues regarding employment standards legislation.

To avoid the appearance of unfairness and duplication, the court granted leave to intervene to the OCC but dismissed CACE's motion.

The court considered a summary judgment motion in a wrongful dismissal case.

The enforceability of the "with cause" and "without cause" termination provisions in the plaintiff's employment contract was at issue.

The court found both provisions unenforceable because they contravened the Employment Standards Act, 2000, following the reasoning in Dufault v. The Corporation of the Township of Ignace and Perretta v. Rand A Technology Corporation.

As a result, the defendant's motion for summary judgment was dismissed, and a further hearing was ordered to determine damages.