Steven D. Gadbois

The appellant appealed an order of the Superior Court of Justice.

The respondent sought to maintain only its claim for damages.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the motion judge that the claim for damages was not foreclosed by res judicata and dismissed the appeal with costs.

The appellants appealed a trial judgment, arguing the trial judge erred in refusing an adjournment to allow them to obtain evidence from Serbia.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge properly exercised his discretion because the appellants waited until the eve of trial to make inquiries and failed to demonstrate the relevance of the proposed evidence.

The appellant appealed the dismissal of its action, which was based entirely on a guarantee.

The motion judge found the guarantee to be remarkably skeletal and lacking sufficient precision to be enforced.

The Court of Appeal agreed, noting the shared position of the parties that the guarantee was not ambiguous despite their opposing interpretations, and dismissed the appeal.

The applicants, both working foremen, applied to terminate the union's bargaining rights for two separate bargaining units (sheet metal workers and roofers) of the employer.

The Board found that the petition circulated by the applicant in the sheet metal unit was not voluntary, as his duties and involvement in seeking concessions would lead employees to reasonably perceive him as acting on behalf of management.

That application was dismissed.

However, the Board found the petition in the roofers' unit to be voluntary, as the applicant circulating it did not have similar duties or involvement.

The Board directed a representation vote for the roofers' unit.