Court of Appeal for Ontario
Lipczynska-Kochany v. Gillham
Lipczynska-Kochany v. University of Waterloo
Date: 2003-02-27
Docket: CA C37075
Counsel: Ewa Lipczynska-Kochany for Appellant/Plaintiff
Reasons for Decision
Doherty J.A.:
[1] The appeal is dismissed for the following reasons:
(a) The Contract Claim
We agree with the trial judge, the terms of the written agreement are clear and were fully understood by the appellant. When the relevant provisions of the University's policies are read in their entirety they are consistent with the plain words of the contract.
The trial judge did not find any misrepresentation as to the likelihood of employment beyond the fixed term. In any event, given the express language of the contract, as to the term of employment it would not have been reasonable to rely on any oral representation to the contract.
The allegations of unfairness depend on the contention that the contract was other than a contract for a definite period with no promise of renewal and subject only to a 6 months notice requirement. As indicated above we cannot accept the appellants interpretation of the contract as we, and the trial judge, interpret it, the appellant was not entitled to employment beyond the two years. She was not dismissed, her contract came to an end.
(b) The Defamation Claim
(4) The "natural justice" argument made by the appellant comes out of the wrongful dismissed cases. It has no relevance to a defamation claim.
(5) The appellant contends that there was evidence of Gillham's malice. The trial judge was not prepared to make a finding of malice. His conclusion was not unreasonable on the totality of the evidence and we cannot interfere with that. The respondents are entitled their costs fixed at $5000.00 to the respondents in each action for a total of $10,000.00.
Appeal dismissed.