If an employee provides notice of his intention to resign on a future date, can his employer legally terminate his employment (i.e. fire him) before that date and not pay him? In a case concerning Quebec labour laws, Quebec (Commission des normes du travail) v. Asphalte Desjardins inc., 2014 SCC 51 (CanLII), the Supreme Court of Canada has said “non”.
An employment law blog.
Sean Bawden, Partner, Kelly Santini LLP.
sbawden@kellysantini.com | 613.238.6321
Sunday 27 July 2014
Resignation Does Not Relieve Employer of Statutory Obligations - Supreme Court of Canada
Sunday 20 July 2014
Ontario Court Says When it Comes to Severance Packages 'A Deal is a Deal'
Can an employer refuse to pay out a severance package after it offers it to an employee and the employee agrees to accept it? That was essentially the question that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice was asked to resolve in the case of Dennis v. Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, 2014 ONSC 3882 (CanLII).
According to the Honourable Justice Brian P. O’Marra, a deal is a deal.
Sunday 13 July 2014
Summary Judgment - Appropriate In Most But Not All Employment Law Cases
Summary judgment remains an effective and appropriate means for the resolution of wrongful dismissal cases. However, as the recently decided case of Beatty v. Best Theratronics Ltd., 2014 ONSC 3376 (CanLII) demonstrates, not all aspects of such cases are amenable to summary disposition.
Sunday 6 July 2014
Answering the Question "Can my employer..."
“Can my employer…” those three little words are the most common start to any question asked of an employment lawyer by a worker. “Can we” is the most common start to questions asked of an employment lawyer by management. The purpose of this post is to address the issue of what employers can do and what am employee’s rights and response can be.
Tuesday 1 July 2014
Ontario Small Claims Court Gains New Powers to Dismiss Claims
As of July 1, 2014, the Ontario Small Claims Court has the power to summarily dismiss any claim made to it, “if the action appears on its face to be inflammatory, a waste of time, a nuisance or an abuse of the court’s process.” This change will be welcomed by those who practice in the Small Claims Court and are sometimes forced to respond to such claims.