Ryan Henry Edmonds

The appellant, a business providing autism treatment services, appealed a Minister's decision finding that an instructional therapist was an employee rather than an independent contractor for the purposes of the Employment Insurance Act and Canada Pension Plan.

The Tax Court of Canada applied the Sagaz and Wiebe Door factors, finding that the appellant exercised significant control over the worker, provided the necessary tools and premises, and that the worker had no chance of profit or risk of loss.

The Court concluded the worker was an employee and dismissed the appeal.

This endorsement addresses the appropriate resolution of costs and clarification of damages following a wrongful dismissal summary judgment motion.

The court determined that for the purpose of comparing a judgment to a Rule 49 offer, damages awards for wrongful dismissal are reduced by statutory termination payments.

Consequently, the plaintiff did not obtain a result more favourable than their Rule 49 offer, nor did the defendant's offer trigger cost consequences under Rule 49.10(2) as the court's award exceeded it when statutory payments were factored in.

The court also ruled that tax consequences are not relevant in a Rule 49 analysis.

The plaintiff was awarded partial indemnity costs, and the net value of the judgment was clarified.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment for wrongful dismissal after being terminated without cause by the defendant.

The court found the matter suitable for summary judgment.

Applying Waksdale, the court held the entire termination clause was void because the 'for cause' provision violated the Employment Standards Act by contracting out of minimum statutory entitlements.

The court awarded a five-month reasonable notice period, finding the plaintiff reasonably mitigated his damages by securing new employment, and calculated damages for base salary, commissions, and benefits, while denying lost pension contributions.

The applicant, a student at the respondent's yoga studio, was barred from attending after the respondent received complaints that he was harassing female staff and students.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that the female complainants had actually subjected him to sexual solicitations and advances, and that the respondent discriminated against him with respect to services based on sexual orientation, race, ancestry, place of origin, ethnic origin, age, and disability.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing and dismissed the application, finding it had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's allegations of sexual solicitations were made in bad faith as a defense against the complaints against him, and that he provided no evidence linking his expulsion to any prohibited grounds of discrimination.

The defendant appealed a master's decision dismissing its motion to transfer a Simplified Procedure action to the Small Claims Court.

The master had declined the transfer because the action was already scheduled for a summary trial in the Superior Court, and a transfer would cause prejudicial delay.

The Superior Court of Justice found no error in principle or palpable and overriding error in the master's exercise of discretion.

The appeal was dismissed, and fresh evidence admitted on consent did not alter the outcome.

In a discharge grievance, the parties addressed disclosure and production issues at the first hearing date.

The Vice Chair directed the Employer to contact the Greater Sudbury Police Service to collect and disclose all documents arguably relevant to the events leading to the Complainant's discharge.

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of age, colour, place of origin, and race.

A summary hearing was scheduled to determine if the application should be dismissed for being untimely or having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant failed to attend the teleconference hearing despite receiving proper notice.

Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned.