479:
given. In providing the employee with reasonable notice, the employer has two options: either to require the employee to continue working for the duration of that period or to give the employee pay in lieu of notice.... There can be no doubt that if the employer opted to require the employee to continue working during the notice period, his or her earnings during this time would constitute wages or salary under s. 68(1) of the Act. The only difference between these earnings and pay in lieu of notice is that the employee receives a lump sum payment instead of having that sum spread out over the course of the notice period. The nature of those funds remains the same and thus s. 68(1) will also apply in these circumstances.
40:
517:
98. The obligation of good faith and fair dealing is incapable of precise definition. However, at a minimum, I believe that in the course of dismissal employers ought to be candid, reasonable, honest and forthright with their employees and should refrain from engaging in conduct that is unfair or is
478:
65. As I see the matter, the underlying nature of the damages awarded in a wrongful dismissal action is clearly akin to the "wages" referred to in s. 68(1). In the absence of just cause, an employer remains free to dismiss an employee at any time provided that reasonable notice of the termination is
413:
Wallace had capacity to sue in the matter, not on the basis that wages are exempt from property that vests in the trustee under
Canadian bankruptcy law, but on the principle that property acquired after the date of bankruptcy does not automatically vest in the trustee in such a way as to prevent the
543:
119. I prefer the second approach for the following reasons. First, this solution seems to me more consistent with the nature of the action for wrongful dismissal. Second, this approach, unlike the alternative, honours the principle that damages must be grounded in a cause of action. Third, this
295:
Wallace was the company's top salesperson throughout his employment, which was terminated in 1986 without explanation. In a letter issued after termination, UGG claimed that "the main reason for his termination was his inability to perform his duties satisfactorily." The termination and allegation
531:
An award of damages for wrongful dismissal should be confined to factors relevant to the prospect of finding replacement employment. It follows that the notice period upon which such damages are based should only be increased for manner of dismissal if this impacts on the employee's prospects of
548:... Fourth, this approach will better aid certainty and predictability in the law governing damages for termination of employment. Finally, there are other equally effective ways to remedy wrongs related to the manner of dismissal which do not affect the prospect of finding replacement work.
470:, Wallace did not become involved in any good-faith transactions for value with a third party after his assignment in bankruptcy. Iacobucci J described damages arising from wrongful dismissal as forming part of the wages exemption under the
292:, and hired Wallace, who had experience in selling such products. As Wallace was 46, he sought and received assurances that he would be treated fairly and have a guarantee of security in employment until at least his 65th birthday.
497:
where the manner of dismissal has caused mental distress but falls short of an independent actionable wrong, the trial judge has discretion to extend the period of reasonable notice to which an employee is
650:
the authorities against
Wallace's position were considered to be more convincing, holding that an action for wrongful dismissal is for damages for breach of contract, not for promised remuneration
507:
the trial judge's award of 24 months was reasonable, as bad faith conduct in the manner of dismissal is another factor that is properly compensated for by an addition to the notice period.
587:
an independent actionable wrong will not give rise to punitive damages, as they will only arise where conduct is harsh, vindictive, reprehensible, malicious and extreme in nature.
539:
As a result, in addition to restoring damages for reasonable notice to 24 months, she would have also restored the award for aggravated damages. She explained her reasoning thus:
504:
there is no foundation for an award of punitive damages, as UGG did not engage in sufficiently "harsh, vindictive, reprehensible and malicious" conduct for that to arise, and
417:
15 months was a more reasonable period of notice, as 24 months was indicative of an element of aggravated damages having crept into the trial judge's determination, and
424:
held that any damages beyond compensation for breach of contract for failure to give reasonable notice "must be founded on a separately actionable course of conduct."
374:
the contract was not in the nature of a fixed term, as such a variation in company policy required the approval of the general manager, the president or the head of
361:
At the initial hearing, Lockwood J held that, as
Wallace was an undischarged bankrupt, he had no capacity to commence an action on his own. His appeal to the
297:
144:
Bad faith conduct in the manner of dismissal is another factor that is properly compensated for by an addition to what may be considered reasonable notice.
501:
an employee cannot sue in either tort or contract for "bad faith discharge", as the law does not recognize any requirement for good faith or fair dealing,
561:
bump," and claims that included it became so frequent that the courts began to criticize the practice. It was subsequently restricted by the Court in
1135:
113:
1114:
1150:
584:
damages for mental distress will be available, as long as they arise naturally from the contract breach and the manner of dismissal, and
134:
An undischarged bankrupt has capacity to sue for wrongful dismissal, as such damages constitute wages that are exempt from vesting in a
1140:
1155:
604:
Subsequent jurisprudence has identified several key areas where an employer's conduct will constitute bad faith that will attract
846:
696:
1145:
399:
Accordingly, he awarded damages of $ 157,700 for wrongful dismissal and $ 15,000 as aggravated damages for mental distress.
386:
the restatement of the claim for mental distress was not made out of time, as it was a clarification made in consequence of
365:
was stayed pending completion of the trial, which was resumed subject to the outcome of the appeal on the bankruptcy issue.
226:
574:
all damages arising out of the manner of dismissal should be recoverable if they arise from the circumstances set out in
571:
where damages are awarded for the conduct of the termination, they should not be awarded by extending the notice period,
581:
the damages awarded must reflect the actual damages sustained and not be an arbitrary extension of the notice period,
300:
for
Wallace, and he was unable to find similar employment elsewhere. Prior to his termination, Wallace had filed for
168:
686:
842:
124:
Appeal allowed in part, La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé and McLachlin JJ. dissenting in part. Cross‑appeal dismissed.
109:
97:
362:
242:
101:
380:
in this case, a reasonable notice period for
Wallace would be 24 months, with damages calculated accordingly,
313:
loss of income, including salary and commissions which would have been earned during the unexpired term of a
257:
535:
The law has evolved to permit recognition of an implied duty of good faith in termination of the employment.
261:
45:
1045:
808:
342:
527:
While agreeing with the majority in most respects, McLachlin J (as she then was) differed on two points:
729:
135:
39:
701:
691:
446:
the Court of Appeal erred in reducing the appellant's reasonable notice damages from 24 to 15 months.
323:
damages for mental distress or aggravated damages, punitive or exemplary damages and special damages.
281:
17:
641:
subsequently amalgamated with UGG in the late 1970s, Public Press was sold to a third party in 1991
314:
164:
1079:
706:
269:
184:
1063:
450:
UGG cross-appealed as to whether an undischarged bankrupt had capacity to sue in this matter.
458:
In a 6–3 decision, the appeal was allowed. The Court unanimously dismissed the cross-appeal.
176:
345:
of actions, as the description of its nature was inserted as an amendment made out of time.
375:
188:
557:
The increase in reasonable notice that was suggested by the SCC came to be known as the "
393:
UGG's conduct was not sufficiently reprehensible to warrant an award of punitive damages.
265:
1129:
192:
157:
71:
518:
in bad faith by being, for example, untruthful, misleading or unduly insensitive....
341:
the claim with respect to mental distress was barred under
Manitoba law relating to
172:
335:
the dismissal was for cause (which was withdrawn on the opening day of the trial),
320:
such amounts that would have been earned under a period of reasonable notice, plus
494:
the courts below did not err in holding that a fixed-term contract did not exist,
407:
The Court allowed an appeal and cross-appeal. In his ruling Scott CJM held that:
301:
180:
289:
704:, 2 SCR 3 (29 June 2006), which applied principles first expressed in
440:
the appellant can sue in either contract or tort for "bad faith discharge",
437:
the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the award for aggravated damages,
430:
Wallace appealed the ruling to the
Supreme Court of Canada as to whether:
285:
368:
In his resulting judgment, Lockwood J found that, subject to the above:
207:
Iacobucci J, joined by Lamer CJ and
Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory and Major JJ
694: at par. 49–61, 2 SCR 362 (27 June 2008), as a consequence of
601:
damages may result in higher monetary awards in certain circumstances.
268:, particularly in determining damages arising from claims concerning
544:
approach seems to me more consistent with the authorities, notably
383:
claims for mental distress were made both in contract and in tort,
104:(Manitoba, Canada), allowing the appeal and cross‑appeal from
1068:
at the SCC: Re-thinking compensation for the manner of dismissal"
597:
not to be dead, but to have evolved, and others point out that
992:
990:
621:
Firing the employee to ensure deprivation of a benefit, and
615:
Damaging the employee's prospects of finding another job,
215:
McLachlin J, joined by La Forest and L'Heureux-Dubé JJ
1115:"Bad faith damages in wrongful dismissal cases: Post-
805:
546:
443:
the appellant was entitled to punitive damages, and
219:
211:
203:
198:
148:
128:
120:
88:
80:
70:
60:
53:
32:
541:
515:
476:
304:in 1985, from which he was discharged in 1988.
307:He sued UGG for wrongful dismissal, claiming:
8:
849:(British Columbia, Canada), among others
618:Misrepresenting the reasons for termination,
338:the employment was not for a fixed term, and
1078:Nancy M. Shapiro; Aaron Hart (April 2010).
1020:
1008:
996:
513:In expanding on the last point, he stated:
65:Jack Wallace v United Grain Growers Limited
697:Fidler v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada
624:Firing the employee in front of coworkers.
260:, 3 SCR 701 is a leading decision of the
722:
634:
280:In 1972, Public Press (a subsidiary of
29:
839:Neilson v. Vancouver Hockey Club Ltd.
488:In the appeal, Iacobucci J declared:
420:aggravated damages did not apply. as
7:
1032:
414:bankrupt from maintaining an action.
106:Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd.
94:Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd.
18:Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd.
730:SCC Case Information - Docket 24986
1048:. HRInsider.ca. 30 September 2010.
253:Wallace v United Grain Growers Ltd
33:Wallace v United Grain Growers Ltd
25:
76:1997 CanLII 332 (SCC), 3 SCR 701
565:to the following circumstances:
38:
811:, 1 SCR 1085 (4 May 1989)
454:At the Supreme Court of Canada
434:a fixed-term contract existed,
329:In its defense, UGG asserted:
1:
1136:Supreme Court of Canada cases
710:, (1854) 9 Ex 341, 156 ER 145
484:Majority ruling in the appeal
284:) expanded its activities in
92:APPEAL and CROSS‑APPEAL from
466:In contrast to the facts in
27:Supreme Court of Canada case
1113:Shafik Bhalloo (May 2006).
750:(1992), 82 Man. R. (2d) 253
1172:
1151:Canadian contract case law
759:(1993), 85 Man. R. (2d) 40
687:Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays
672:a proposition endorsed in
563:Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays
1141:1997 in Canadian case law
612:Making false accusations,
288:through acquisition of a
240:
233:
224:
153:
133:
100: (8 September 1995),
56:Judgment: 30 October 1997
37:
1156:Canadian labour case law
403:Manitoba Court of Appeal
363:Manitoba Court of Appeal
264:in the area of Canadian
243:Honda Canada Inc v Keays
1062:Anne Côté (Fall 2008).
1021:Shapiro & Hart 2010
1009:Shapiro & Hart 2010
997:Shapiro & Hart 2010
732:Supreme Court of Canada
262:Supreme Court of Canada
46:Supreme Court of Canada
1146:Canadian tort case law
845: (11 April 1988),
593:Most lawyers consider
550:
520:
481:
357:Court of Queen's Bench
116:(Manitoba, Canada)
114:Court of Queen's Bench
1066:Honda Canada v. Keays
523:Dissent in the appeal
356:
169:Claire L'Heureux-Dubé
136:trustee in bankruptcy
54:Hearing: 22 May 1997
1101:. Koskie Minsky LLP.
1046:"Wrongful Dismissal"
663:, (1890), 25 QBD 262
282:United Grain Growers
112: (7 July 1993),
317:, or alternatively,
315:fixed-term contract
286:commercial printing
707:Hadley v Baxendale
298:emotional distress
270:wrongful dismissal
185:Beverley McLachlin
984:SCC, par. 136–146
975:SCC, par. 115–132
661:Cohen v. Mitchell
249:
248:
16:(Redirected from
1163:
1122:
1102:
1100:
1074:
1072:
1050:
1049:
1042:
1036:
1030:
1024:
1018:
1012:
1006:
1000:
994:
985:
982:
976:
973:
967:
966:SCC, par. 80–109
964:
958:
955:
949:
946:
940:
937:
931:
928:
922:
919:
913:
910:
904:
901:
895:
892:
886:
883:
877:
874:
868:
865:
859:
856:
850:
843:1988 CanLII 3300
836:
830:
827:
821:
818:
812:
802:
796:
793:
787:
784:
778:
775:
769:
766:
760:
757:
751:
748:
742:
739:
733:
727:
711:
683:
677:
676:, 1 Ch 219 (CA)
670:
664:
657:
651:
648:
642:
639:
352:The courts below
177:Charles Gonthier
165:GĂ©rard La Forest
162:Puisne Justices:
149:Court membership
110:1993 CanLII 4411
98:1995 CanLII 6262
42:
30:
21:
1171:
1170:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1162:
1161:
1160:
1126:
1125:
1121:. Kornfeld LLP.
1112:
1109:
1107:Further reading
1098:
1077:
1070:
1061:
1058:
1053:
1044:
1043:
1039:
1031:
1027:
1019:
1015:
1011:, pp. 5–6.
1007:
1003:
995:
988:
983:
979:
974:
970:
965:
961:
956:
952:
948:SCC, par. 76–78
947:
943:
939:SCC, par. 73–74
938:
934:
930:SCC, par. 38–71
929:
925:
920:
916:
911:
907:
903:MBCA, pp. 49–51
902:
898:
893:
889:
885:MBCA, pp. 39–41
884:
880:
875:
871:
867:MBCA, pp. 17–33
866:
862:
857:
853:
847:Court of Appeal
837:
833:
829:MBQB, pp. 32–34
828:
824:
820:MBQB, pp. 30–31
819:
815:
803:
799:
795:MBQB, pp. 16–29
794:
790:
785:
781:
777:MBQB, pp. 12–14
776:
772:
767:
763:
758:
754:
749:
745:
740:
736:
728:
724:
720:
715:
714:
684:
680:
671:
667:
658:
654:
649:
645:
640:
636:
631:
555:
525:
486:
464:
456:
405:
376:human resources
359:
354:
278:
258:1997 CanLII 332
236:
189:Frank Iacobucci
160:
143:
102:Court of Appeal
55:
49:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1169:
1167:
1159:
1158:
1153:
1148:
1143:
1138:
1128:
1127:
1124:
1123:
1119:jurisprudence"
1108:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1075:
1057:
1054:
1052:
1051:
1037:
1025:
1013:
1001:
986:
977:
968:
959:
950:
941:
932:
923:
914:
905:
896:
887:
878:
869:
860:
851:
831:
822:
813:
809:1989 CanLII 93
797:
788:
779:
770:
761:
752:
743:
734:
721:
719:
716:
713:
712:
678:
665:
652:
643:
633:
632:
630:
627:
626:
625:
622:
619:
616:
613:
591:
590:
589:
588:
585:
582:
579:
572:
554:
551:
537:
536:
533:
532:re-employment.
524:
521:
511:
510:
509:
508:
505:
502:
499:
495:
485:
482:
472:Bankruptcy Act
463:
460:
455:
452:
448:
447:
444:
441:
438:
435:
428:
427:
426:
425:
418:
415:
404:
401:
397:
396:
395:
394:
391:
384:
381:
378:
358:
355:
353:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
339:
336:
327:
326:
325:
324:
321:
318:
277:
274:
266:employment law
247:
246:
238:
237:
234:
231:
230:
227:Bankruptcy Act
222:
221:
217:
216:
213:
212:Concur/dissent
209:
208:
205:
201:
200:
196:
195:
155:Chief Justice:
151:
150:
146:
145:
140:Bankruptcy Act
131:
130:
126:
125:
122:
118:
117:
90:
86:
85:
82:
78:
77:
74:
68:
67:
62:
61:Full case name
58:
57:
51:
50:
43:
35:
34:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1168:
1157:
1154:
1152:
1149:
1147:
1144:
1142:
1139:
1137:
1134:
1133:
1131:
1120:
1118:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1097:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1076:
1069:
1067:
1060:
1059:
1055:
1047:
1041:
1038:
1034:
1029:
1026:
1023:, p. 21.
1022:
1017:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1002:
998:
993:
991:
987:
981:
978:
972:
969:
963:
960:
954:
951:
945:
942:
936:
933:
927:
924:
918:
915:
909:
906:
900:
897:
891:
888:
882:
879:
873:
870:
864:
861:
855:
852:
848:
844:
840:
835:
832:
826:
823:
817:
814:
810:
806:
801:
798:
792:
789:
783:
780:
774:
771:
765:
762:
756:
753:
747:
744:
738:
735:
731:
726:
723:
717:
709:
708:
703:
699:
698:
693:
689:
688:
682:
679:
675:
669:
666:
662:
656:
653:
647:
644:
638:
635:
628:
623:
620:
617:
614:
611:
610:
609:
607:
602:
600:
596:
586:
583:
580:
577:
573:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
564:
560:
552:
549:
547:
540:
534:
530:
529:
528:
522:
519:
514:
506:
503:
500:
496:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
483:
480:
475:
473:
469:
461:
459:
453:
451:
445:
442:
439:
436:
433:
432:
431:
423:
419:
416:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
402:
400:
392:
389:
385:
382:
379:
377:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
366:
364:
351:
344:
340:
337:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
322:
319:
316:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
305:
303:
299:
296:caused great
293:
291:
287:
283:
275:
273:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
245:
244:
239:
235:Superseded by
232:
229:
228:
223:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
199:Reasons given
197:
194:
193:John C. Major
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
159:
158:Antonio Lamer
156:
152:
147:
141:
137:
132:
127:
123:
119:
115:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
91:
89:Prior history
87:
83:
79:
75:
73:
69:
66:
63:
59:
52:
48:
47:
41:
36:
31:
19:
1116:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1073:. Field LLP.
1065:
1040:
1035:, p. 2.
1028:
1016:
1004:
999:, p. 4.
980:
971:
962:
957:SCC, par. 79
953:
944:
935:
926:
921:SCC, par. 36
917:
912:SCC, par. 36
908:
899:
894:SCC, par. 29
890:
881:
876:SCC, par. 28
872:
863:
858:SCC, par. 23
854:
838:
834:
825:
816:
804:
800:
791:
782:
773:
764:
755:
746:
737:
725:
705:
695:
685:
681:
673:
668:
660:
655:
646:
637:
605:
603:
598:
594:
592:
575:
562:
558:
556:
545:
542:
538:
526:
516:
512:
487:
477:
471:
467:
465:
462:Cross-appeal
457:
449:
429:
421:
406:
398:
387:
367:
360:
328:
306:
294:
279:
252:
251:
250:
241:
225:
220:Laws applied
173:John Sopinka
161:
154:
139:
105:
93:
64:
44:
786:MBQB, p. 15
768:SCC, par. 9
741:SCC, par. 6
702:2006 SCC 30
692:2008 SCC 39
659:relying on
474:, stating:
1130:Categories
718:References
343:limitation
302:bankruptcy
276:Background
181:Peter Cory
138:under the
81:Docket No.
1033:Côté 2008
674:Re Pascoe
608:damages:
498:entitled,
290:web press
72:Citations
204:Majority
1117:Wallace
1094:Wallace
1086:Wallace
1056:Sources
841:,
807:,
700:,
690:,
606:Wallace
595:Wallace
576:Wallace
559:Wallace
256:,
129:Holding
108:,
96:,
1096:dead?"
1082:Vorvis
553:Impact
422:Vorvis
388:Vorvis
121:Ruling
84:24986
1099:(PDF)
1092:: Is
1090:Keays
1071:(PDF)
629:Notes
599:Keays
578:, but
468:Cohen
390:, and
1088:and
1132::
1084:,
989:^
272:.
191:,
187:,
183:,
179:,
175:,
171:,
167:,
1080:"
1064:"
142:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
