Ronald Lebi

The applicants brought a motion for review of an order by Abella J.A. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion, finding it had no jurisdiction to address the merits of the underlying dispute or grant most of the requested remedies, such as reinstatement.

Furthermore, the applicants failed to seek the required leave to appeal under s. 6(1)(a) of the Courts of Justice Act.

The court also rejected the applicants' claim that the Union or the Ontario Labour Relations Board had an obligation to provide them with counsel.

The applicant employer sought judicial review of an arbitrator's award which found that the employer could not discharge a grievor for events that were already known and covered by a prior one-day suspension.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that the arbitrator's conclusion was entirely reasonable on the record and not patently unreasonable.

Costs of $4,500 were awarded to the respondent union.

The applicant employer association sought judicial review of an arbitrator's decision dismissing its application for final offer selection to amend a collective agreement.

The applicant argued the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to dismiss the application and was required to choose one of the two final offers.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding that under the pragmatic and functional approach, the arbitrator's interpretation of the collective agreement was subject to a patently unreasonable standard of review.

The court held it was not patently unreasonable for the arbitrator to conclude that the existence of a competitive disadvantage had to be verified before an offer could be selected, and that the arbitrator's factual findings were supported by evidence.

The applicant employees sought judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision dismissing their claim for statutory holiday pay under the Employment Standards Act.

The employees commenced a lawful strike on July 4, the first scheduled workday after the Canada Day holiday.

The Board found they were disqualified from holiday pay because they failed to work their scheduled day of work following the public holiday.

The Divisional Court applied the reasonableness standard of review and dismissed the application, finding the Board's purposive interpretation of the Act was supported by a tenable explanation.

The appellant employer appealed a Divisional Court decision quashing a Referee's ruling that the respondent employee's claim for severance pay under the Employment Standards Act was statute-barred.

The employee had delayed filing his claim because the employer falsely represented in his termination letter that his early pension option exceeded provincial requirements.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Referee's interpretation of the limitation period and refusal to apply the doctrine of fraudulent concealment to be unreasonable.

The Union appealed a Divisional Court decision dismissing its application for judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision.

The Board had concluded it lacked jurisdiction to issue remedies against Ministry of Labour inspectors regarding work refusal investigations under s. 43(7) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Prior to the appeal, the underlying dispute was settled and the statutory provision was amended.

The Court of Appeal quashed the appeal as moot, declining to exercise its discretion to hear it due to an incomplete record and judicial economy.

The appellant town terminated its contract with a transportation company for the operation of its municipal transit system and commenced operating the system itself, hiring a significant number of the company's laid-off workers.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board found that a 'sale of a business' had occurred under s. 64 of the Labour Relations Act, binding the town as a successor employer.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the town's appeal, holding that the Board's finding of a nexus between the company and the town was not patently unreasonable given their historical and functional connection.

The applicant sought judicial review of an Ontario Labour Relations Board decision that included secretaries to judges in a union bargaining unit.

The Divisional Court quashed the Board's decision, holding that the Board erred in its interpretation of judicial independence.

The majority found that including judicial secretaries in the bargaining unit created an inevitable conflict of interest, as they are integral to the administrative independence and confidential functions of the judiciary.