In preparing to write about Shafron v. KRG Insurance Brokers (Western) Inc., 2009 SCC 6, I prepared myself for a complicated analysis of restrictive covenants in employment contracts. The facts of this case were so detailed, they must have indicated a correspondingly complex legal analysis. I was pleased to discover, however, that the 10-year factual [...]

On January 21, the SCC heard the case of Johanne Desbiens, et al. v. Wal-Mart Canada Corporation (32527). The case involves the final appeal of several Wal-Mart employees whose efforts in forming a union at a Wal-Mart store was stifled by the closure of the store where the employees worked. The facts and issues in [...]

The Supreme Court navigated through a political minefield last Thursday when it pronounced on the constitutionality of several aspects of the federal employment insurance system in Confédération des syndicats nationaux v. Canada (Attorney General), 2008 SCC 68. The issues arising in the case have been the subject of much controversy, with the appellants claiming, among [...]

For financial management company Merrill Lynch, it seems the bad news just keeps on coming. It’s been a tumultuous couple of weeks for Merrill Lynch. Already battered and reeling from a series of large writedowns stemming from the subprime crisis, the current credit crunch proved too much for the company to bear as the Wall [...]

New Brunswick (Human Rights Commission) v. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan Inc, 2008 SCC 45 (“Potash”), provides an interesting debate on how to interpret human rights law. While legal observers might have safely assumed that this is no longer a question, this case, in its departing analysis between the majority and minority, begs one to reconsider. [...]

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hydro-Québec v. Syndicat des employé-e-s de techniques professionnelles et de bureau d’Hydro-Québec, section locale 2000, 2008 SCC 43, reinterprets the common law account of employers’ duty to accommodate disabled employees in the workplace. The court has not drastically departed from its past jurisprudence, but rather has reiterated the need [...]

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Keays v. Honda Canada, 2008 SCC 39, (summarized by Solomon Lam here) was a major victory for employers everywhere. In reducing both aggravated and punitive damages to zero, the Supreme Court of Canada has effectively deemed that Honda’s conduct, while harmful, was not egregiously harmful. It is worth remembering [...]

Last Friday the Supreme Court handed down its ruling on Honda v. Kevin Keays, 2008 SCC 39. Considered a watershed employment law case, Keays had no less than nine intervenors and has been the subject of much attention in both the legal community and the media. TheCourt.ca contributor Michael Lynk provided a useful analysis of [...]

On May 1st, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision in Evans v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31, 2008 SCC 20 clarifying treatment of the issue of mitigation in employment law. With this decision, it has markedly altered the treatment of breach of employment contract in a manner that profoundly disadvantages wrongfully dismissed employees, [...]

This past Thursday marked the conclusion of Donald Evans’ five year struggle to obtain damages for his wrongful dismissal from the Teamsters Local Union No. 31, Evans’ employer of 23 years. In Evans v. Teamsters Local Union No. 31, 2008 SCC 20, a majority of the Supreme Court sided with both the Teamsters and the [...]