Ontario Recognizes Tort of Invasion of Privacy

(c) istock/vchal

When the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in the case of Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 many commented upon how Ontario law had finally recognized the tort of "invasion of personal privacy."

However, saying that the Court of Appeal recognized “the tort” is not entirely accurate. What the Court of Appeal recognized was that there are, in fact, four torts that fall under the umbrella of ‘invasion of privacy.’

The Requirement to Maintain Disability Benefits on Dismissal

As regular readers of this blog may know, I have a certain affinity for the decision of the late Justice Echlin in Brito v. Canac Kitchens, 2011 ONSC 1011 (CanLII), affirmed by the Court of Appeal for Ontario, 2012 ONCA 61.

The reason why the decision in Brito is so important is that Justice Echlin ordered an employer who had provided to its employees a group insurance plan to essentially stand in the disability insurer’s shoes when the employee was dismissed and the employer made no arrangements for the dismissed employee to maintain that insurance coverage beyond the statutory notice period; a decision that cost the employer nearly $200,000 in what was otherwise a modest wrongful dismissal case.

Ontario Human Rights Damages to Dismissed Breast Cancer Employee Affirmed

One may recall the story of Elsa Torrejon, who in 2009 was fired from her employer, Weston Property Management, after disclosing that she had breast cancer. The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal ordered Weston to pay Ms. Torrejon $20,000 in general damages for injury to dignity, feelings and self respect and $2,640 in special damages for loss of employment income.

Now, if Weston’s behavior was not bad enough – terminating an employee simply because she discloses a diagnosis – Weston sought judicial review of the Tribunal’s decision from the Ontario Divisional Court. In reasons for decision released March 30, 2012, 1147335 Ontario Inc., o/a Weston Property Management v. Torrejon, 2012 ONSC 1978 (CanLII), Justices Jennings, Kent and Sanderson affirmed the Tribunal’s decision awarding a further $7,000 in costs.

How Much Time Do You Have to Start a Lawsuit for Wrongful Dismissal in Ontario?

How long do you have to start a claim for wrongful dismissal under Ontario law?

While the default (and safe) answer would be two years from the date of dismissal, a 2010 decision from the Ontario Superior Court demonstrates that that may not always be the case.

Social Media and the Rule against Solicitation

As someone who both practices employment law and blogs, tweets, whatever verb Facebook becomes, a question that is often put to me by persons contemplating moving to a new employer is whether that person is entitled to change the name of his or her employer on various social media sites.

The answer is more complicated than it would first appear; and, I would submit, also remains unanswered by Ontario courts. Nonetheless, below one will find the musings of this passive observer.

Careless but not Disentitled

Just cause for termination is a thorny issue. Employers often wish to advance it as a means of reducing (hopefully to nil) their obligations to an employee on termination. However, under Ontario employment law, one can be both dismissed for just cause and entitled to termination pay and severance. A fact, I would respectfully submit, lost on many including most judges unfamiliar with the nuances of Ontario employment law.

The 2011 case of Oosterbosch v. FAG Aerospace Inc., 2011 ONSC 1538 (CanLII) succinctly demonstrates the difference.

Doctors' Notes - Better Late than Never

Doctors are very busy people.  What doctors are primarily busy with are sick people.  Unfortunately, in addition to treating to the sick doctors are asked to complete a lot of paperwork confirming that those people are sick.  What happens, however, when a doctor is late in providing the necessary information to an employee’s employer or disability insurer?  Can the employer reasonably assume that because no medical note has been provided the employee has abandoned his position?

In a decision released June 26, 2012, Canadian Office and Professional Employees Union v. Yellow Pages Group Company, 2012 ONCA 448, the Court of Appeal for Ontario made two important rulings: (1) the contextual approach in McKinley remains the appropriate approach for unjust termination cases; and (2) concerns a labour arbitrator expresses about an employee’s lack of candour in the arbitration process are not relevant to the wrongful dismissal analysis as any dishonesty on the claimant’s part at that stage played no part in the employer’s decision to terminate his employment.