Is it a discriminatory act to ask someone applying for employment whether he or she is legally eligible to work in Canada on a permanent basis?
If the answer to that question is “yes”, then what is the effect of an applicant repeatedly lying about the answer.
In a series of decisions spanning a number of years from the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, the answers to those questions were “yes” and “not much.”
Once an employee has been afforded accommodation for his disability, is the specific accommodation set in stone forever, or can an employer alter the specific accommodation, so long as it does not do so in a way that would result in discrimination?
In City of Toronto v. Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79, 2019 ONSC 4045 (CanLII), the Ontario Divisional Court rejected the argument that an employer cannot alter an accommodation.
If a contractual termination clause provides for “the greater of” ESA entitlements and a set amount, will the guarantee of “the greater of” act as a failsafe if the rest of the provision is contrary to the provisions of the ESA?
In Andros v. Colliers Macaulay Nicolls Inc., 2019 ONCA 679 (CanLII) , the Court of Appeal for Ontario said “no.”
Can an employee change her mind about resignation, if the impetus for such voluntary resignation ceases to be an issue, and the employee has not yet left employment?
In the third in a series of decisions concerning “working resignation”, English v. Manulife Financial Corporation, 2019 ONCA 612 , the Court of Appeal of Ontario said yes.
Is the issue of the “conscionability” of a full and final release, signed as part of a severance negotiation and purporting to release claims to long-term disability benefits, the kind of issue appropriate for resolution by way of summary judgment?
Notwithstanding the agreement of the parties that it was, in Swampillai v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, 2019 ONCA 201, the Court of Appeal for Ontario held that, in the circumstances of this case, the issue of whether the release was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable was a genuine issue requiring a trial.
