Sexual harassment and failure to accept employer’s disciplinary measures is cause for termination
An employer has just cause to terminate an employee for inappropriate, sexually harassing comments and refusing to apologize, the Ontario Court of Appeal recently held. Employers should be particularly interested in this decision given the weight placed on the Workplace Harassment Policy. Facts In Hucsko v. A.O. Smith Enterprises Limited, John Hucsko, an employee with 20 years of service, was terminated by his employer arising from a complaint made by his female co-worker. The employer investigated four incidents and determined there was a pattern of comments made by Hucsko of a sexual nature directed at the complainant. Hucsko knew or ... [more] Full article
Employee not entitled to wrongful dismissal damages for share bonus (dividend) during notice period, Court of Appeal affirms
Update: The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Mr. Mikelsteins’ application for leave to appeal without reasons on January 20, 2022. The Ontario Court of Appeal affirmed last week its earlier ... [more] Full article
Court of Appeal to revisit employee’s right to wrongful dismissal damages regarding shareholdings
Update: The Court of Appeal reconsidered its earlier decision in light of Matthews v. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd. but it did not change the outcome of the appeal. Read a ... [more] Full article
Employee suspension ruled constructive dismissal: Supreme Court
Employers would be wise to consider the terms of an employee’s contract before administratively suspending him or her. The Supreme Court of Canada held that administrative suspensions must be both ... [more] Full article
- Court Reduces Notice Period, Employee Should Have Known Better
- Pension Benefits Do Not Replace Wages Owed, Supreme Court Rules
- Six months’ severance is six months’ severance! Dismissed employee awarded full contractual severance, despite new job
- Reasonable notice periods still not “one size fits all”
Wrongful Dismissal Contributors
Kenneth A. Dekker
Kenneth Dekker, a partner of the firm, is a successful trial and appellate lawyer who is valued by his clients as a resourceful and practical litigation counsel. Over more than two decades, Ken has litigated noteworthy cases in a range of fields that include class action defence, securities and broker-dealer litigation and regulatory defence, corporate and shareholder disputes (including oppression and winding up cases), defamation, civil fraud litigation, disputes over contracts, injunctions, professional liability litigation, employment litigation and cross-border litigation issues. Ken has appeared before all levels of courts in Ontario, including the Ontario Court of Justice, the Superior Court of Justice, the Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal for Ontario, as well as before the Supreme Court of Canada. Ken also represents and advises clients in regulatory matters before the Investment Industry Organization of Canada (IIROC), the Mutual Fund Dealers Association of Canada (MFDA) and the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC). Ken has been ranked as Repeatedly Recommended for Securities Litigation by Lexpert, for Corporate and Commercial Litigation by Best Lawyers of Canada, and he has been given the highest available rating of AV, or pre-eminent, by his peers on Martindale-Hubbell.
Meredith Hayward
Meredith has earned an impressive reputation for her skill and abilities in Commercial Litigation and Administrative Law, appearing at all levels of court in Ontario, before the British Columbia Court of Appeal, and before the Supreme Court of Canada.
Masiel A. Matus
Masiel has a broad commercial litigation practice and represents both national and international clients in a variety of complex matters. Masiel has experience litigating cases involving professional negligence, commercial leasing and real property disputes, insurance, contract disputes, shareholder disputes, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust, employment matters and defamation claims.
