DATE: 20050920

DOCKET: C43275

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE:

BRENDA MORRIS (Plaintiff/Appellant) – and – THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY and CITY OF TORONTO

BEFORE:

LABROSSE, SHARPE and ROULEAU JJ.A.

COUNSEL:

P. Michael Rotondo

for the appellant

Robert Fredericks

for City of Toronto

Giulia Ahmadi

for The Manufacturers Life Assurance Company

HEARD & ENDORSED:

September 16, 2005

On appeal from the order of Justice Gladys I. Pardu of the Superior Court of Justice dated February24, 2005.

A P P E A L B O O K E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] We agree with the motions judge that the essential character of this dispute arises from the interpretation, application, or administration of a collective agreement and that the courts must decline jurisdiction. We also agree with her conclusion that the parties to the collective agreement intended that disputes about “benefit entitlements” would be resolved by arbitration. It is also clearly stated in the LTD plan that no action may be brought against Manulife, the R.S.O. While the plan does refer to legal claims against the city, the plan also applies to non-unionized employees and, so far as employees covered by a collective agreement are concerned, the language of the plan must be read in conjunction with the collective agreement.

[2] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs fixed at $5000 to the city and $1000 to Manulife.