The appellant union sought a successorship declaration after a unionized construction company set up a parallel non-unionized company to bid on non-union projects, a practice known as double breasting.
The Labour Relations Board granted the declaration, finding a disposition of business had occurred.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the Board's decision was patently unreasonable because there was no evidence of a transfer or disposition of assets, work, or expertise from the unionized company to the non-unionized company.
The appeal was dismissed, affirming the quashing of the Board's order.
