CITATION: Khatib v. GoEasy Ltd, 2026 ONSC 4238
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
Shadi Khatib
Applicant
– and –
GoEasy Ltd.
Respondent
Muneeza Sheikh, Aisha Abawajy, for the Applicant
Jonathan H. Pinkus, Gurlal Kler, for the Respondent
HEARD: March 9-12, 2026
Mathen, J.
SUPPLEMENTAL REASONS
1On June 16, 2026, I issued trial reasons in a wrongful dismissal case.
2Among other things, I found that the plaintiff, Shadi Khatib, was entitled to:
a. Damages in lieu of eight months’ notice from the date of his termination on October 21, 2019, less mitigation.
b. A bonus for 2019, and for the period between January 1, 2020, to June 21, 2020, at 40% of his base salary.
c. An amount for certain entitlements under his Long-Term Incentive Plan.
d. $416.66 in lieu of medical health and dental benefits.
3At the close of trial, both parties submitted charts showing their approach to the various categories of damages.
4After considering submissions from both parties, I gave instructions about how the plaintiff should calculate LTIP based on certain figures in his charts and certain figures I provided.
5The plaintiff submitted his calculations. The calculations referenced $1,736.10 for a dividend in relation to a May 3, 2017, RSU.
6Dividends were included in the plaintiff’s charts but were not a focus of the hearing and were not specifically addressed in my reasons.
7The defendant objects to inclusion of dividends as, in their view, the issue was never decided.
8In response to an opportunity to provide further submissions, the plaintiff argues that:
a. The dividend payment flows naturally from my decision to grant Mr. Khatib the relevant RSU.
b. The dividend falls within the “value of the Plaintiff’s LTIP entitlement” as stated in paragraph 1(b) of the Statement of Claim.
c. Other than the term “dividend” not being specifically mentioned in the trial reasons, the defendant has not offered a reason why (a) the calculation is wrong or (b) dividends would not be owing under an RSU.
9This is a complex case with different calculations.
10In the circumstances, especially given that dividends were noted in the plaintiff’s charts which I did say were to be a basis for calculations, I find that the cited dividend flows naturally from my decision to award Mr. Khatib some value for his LTIP.
ORDER
11In conclusion, I make the following order:
a. The plaintiff may submit for my signature an Order that reflects my trial decision. The plaintiff shall include the amounts specified in its further submission dated June 30, 2026.
b. For clarity, the plaintiff may include the amount of $1,736.10 for dividends in respect of the May 3, 2017, RSU grant.
c. The 45-day deadline for receiving costs submissions runs from the date of this supplemental endorsement.
Mathen, J.
Released: July 21, 2026
CITATION: Khatib v. GoEasy Ltd, 2026 ONSC 4238
COURT FILE NO.: CV-19-00633555-0000
DATE: 20260721
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
Shadi Khatib
Applicant
– and –
Goeasy Ltd.
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Mathen J.
Released: July 21, 2026