Canada: Unfair/ Wrongful Dismissal

Canadian employment law faces evolving challenges as courts navigate cross-border contractor disputes, bad faith termination damages, and the potential prohibition of non-compete clauses under proposed federal legislation. Recent judicial decisions highlight critical distinctions between employee rights and contractual obligations, while examining the interplay between asset purchase agreements and employment contracts in business transactions.

Foreign companies entering Canada face a complex employment law landscape where common US practices often fail legal scrutiny. Understanding the differences between at-will termination...

On May 1, 2026, the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB) issued its remedy decision in Braganza v. Randstad Canada (LRB Case No. 1768-23-UR), awarding a self-represented applicant $195,833.26 in compensation following a finding of reprisal under section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).

Ontario employers can place employees on temporary layoffs under specific circumstances, but the legality depends on employment contracts, statutory limits, and common law rights. Understanding the difference between lawful temporary layoffs and constructive dismissal is crucial, as calling a decision a "layoff" doesn't automatically protect employers from termination obligations or prevent employees from claiming wrongful dismissal.

When an Ontario employer terminates an employee for cause based on alleged misconduct, courts will scrutinize whether the conduct was truly dishonest or whether it reflected longstanding, accepted workplace practices. The Wilsher v Olympic Wholesale decision demonstrates how informal, undocumented policies and inconsistent enforcement can expose employers to significant liability, including extended notice periods and reputational harm.

La Cour d'appel de l'Ontario a récemment statué qu'un employeur ne peut exiger qu'un employé renonce à sa rémunération en actions non acquise lors de la cessation d'emploi, augmentant les dommages-intérêts de 4,7 millions $ US. Cette décision dans l'arrêt Wigdor c. Facebook Canada Ltd.

A recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd. has dramatically altered the landscape for equity compensation plans in Canada. The ruling found that Restricted Stock Unit forfeiture provisions may violate Employment Standards Act minimum standards, resulting in a multi-million dollar damages award. Employers using RSUs or similar equity-based compensation must now reassess whether their plan documents comply with evolving judicial interpretations of statutory notice period prote

The Ontario Court of Appeal has clarified how termination clauses in employment agreements should be interpreted, rejecting purely literal readings of phrases like "at any time" or "for any reason."

The Ontario Court of Appeal has issued a landmark ruling on employment termination provisions, addressing whether contractual language permitting termination "at any time" or "for any reason" violates the Employment Standards Act. This decision overturns a controversial lower court ruling and provides crucial clarity for employers drafting termination clauses. The court emphasized a practical, contextual approach to interpreting employment contracts rather than isolating specific phrases.