Court File and Parties
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 18-337
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO
DIVISIONAL COURT
RE: HORWITZ, Applicant/Appellant
AND:
CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE, Respondent
BEFORE: Myers, J.
COUNSEL: Howard Markowitz, for the Applicant/Appellant
Edward O’Dwyer and Frank Cesario, for the Respondent
HEARD at Toronto:
TRANSCRIPTION OF HANDWRITTEN ENDORSEMENT
1The Judge interpreted the employment agreement and found it unambiguous. The 3 week minimum notice only applies when there is a release. The other option – where there is no release or an employee is terminated within 3 months, provides for employment standards legislation to apply. These are two separate baskets that do not overlap.
2Sattva provides than an appellate court is to defer to interpretation of a contract absent palpable/overriding error or an extricable error of law. The judge carefully recited the applicable law and applied a business-like, sensible reading to which I must and do defer.
3I do not accept the argument that a broad amendment clause is necessarily void or, even if it is, voids the termination clause. No law was provided for that position.
4I also do not accept that the Judge adds words to the agreement to find that the CLC [[Canada Labour Code, RSC 1985, c L-2] applied. The statute applied by its terms. The fact that it provided no entitlement to the appellant was properly dealt with by the Judge.
5Appeal dismissed.
6Costs to CIBC fixed at $4,000 all-in are to be paid within sixty (60) days.
“F.L. Myers”
Myers, J.
Date: September 18, 2019