Employers walk a fine line when trying to implement changes to their employees’ terms of employment. They often ask us the following: “how do we prevent a constructive dismissal claim?” A recent Ontario decision provides employers with helpful guidance about making unilateral changes without falling into the constructive dismissal trap. What is constructive dismissal? Constructive
It is no secret that Canadian courts have a strong aversion to restrictive covenants in the employment context. The common law presumption has long been that such obligations are restraints on trade, and are therefore prima facie unenforceable unless they are reasonable between the parties and with reference to the public interest. Courts generally consider
In December, 2015, I wrote a blog on the 2015 Ontario Superior Court (the “ONSC”) decision in Oudin v. Le Centre Francophone de Toronto (“Oudin”). The decision was of particular interest because the court found that a termination provision effectively displaced the common law presumption of an employee’s entitlement to reasonable notice of termination despite:
After three months’ hiatus, I’m back with the second half of this series. Given the delay, I suspect some may need to have their memories jogged (pull out those sweatbands!). Without further ado, I invite you to have a gander at “Where HR Professionals Get It Wrong: Employment Counsels’ Collective Musings”. What I find most
The recent decision of Chen v. Moxie’s Restaurants Management Inc. from small claims court in British Columbia highlights some of the fundamental requirements for a workplace investigation and the consequences of an inadequate investigation. Mr. Chen was an employee of Moxie’s Restaurants for approximately four months until he was dismissed when one of the female
July first marks the one year countdown to our country’s 150th birthday. To celebrate this milestone, our lawyers will be writing a special blog on the first of each month for the next year. The blog will have no more than 150 words (#150words) from a case, or a legal document, or just something about
Over three years ago, we blogged about a case where an employee, Sharon Fair, was reinstated after almost a decade had passed since her dismissal, because her dismissal was held to be discriminatory. The specifics of the case can be found on our blog post here but in short, Ms. Fair alleged that she had
There are a number of “piggyback” claims that we see as part of wrongful dismissal claims against our employer clients – intentional infliction of mental distress; discrimination contrary to human rights legislation etc. Amongst these “piggyback” claims is defamation. An employee may claim that the employer (through one or more of its employees) has made
Follow us:
Rubin Thomlinson LLP
Tel: (416) 847-1814 | Fax: (416) 847-1815
Privacy Statement | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2026
