D.H. Howden & Co. v. Sparling

D.H. Howden & Co. v. Sparling

The court held that the natural meaning of "gross profit" in the employment letter is net selling price less the laid-down cost consisting of vendor invoice plus incoming freight and direct handling charges (but excluding general overhead); the trial judge erred by failing to allow for incoming freight in calculating unpaid commissions, and the proper correction reduces the unpaid commission award from $18,607.70 to $15,165.75; the finding of wrongful dismissal was supported by evidence and the $7,000 damages award (about one-third of a year's earnings) was upheld.

Citation
[1970] SCR 883
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: D.H. Howden and Company Limited; Respondent / Plaintiff: Ronald J. Sparling
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 April 1970
Procedural Posture
Contract and Torts Appeal (employment Contract, Wrongful Dismissal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Employment Contract Interpretation, Meaning of Gross Profit for Commission Calculation, Calculation of Unpaid Commissions, Wrongful Dismissal Damages, Reasonable Notice for Managerial Employees
Source Language
English
Contract Torts Employment Law Remedies Employment Contract Interpretation Meaning of Gross Profit for Commission Calculation Calculation of Unpaid Commissions Wrongful Dismissal Damages +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D.H. Howden and Company Limited

Appellant / Defendant

Ronald J. Sparling

Respondent / Plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Contract and Torts Appeal (employment Contract, Wrongful Dismissal) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the meaning of "gross profit" in the commission clause of the employment letter?
  2. 2 Whether unpaid commissions were correctly calculated and what deductions (freight, handling, overhead) are permissible in computing gross profit
  3. 3 Whether the dismissal was wrongful and the appropriate measure of damages for wrongful dismissal of a managerial employee

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the natural meaning of "gross profit" in the employment letter is net selling price less the laid-down cost consisting of vendor invoice plus incoming freight and direct handling charges (but excluding general overhead); the trial judge erred by failing to allow for incoming freight in calculating unpaid commissions, and the proper correction reduces the unpaid commission award from $18,607.70 to $15,165.75; the finding of wrongful dismissal was supported by evidence and the $7,000 damages award (about one-third of a year's earnings) was upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Reduce unpaid commissions award from 18607.70 CAD to 15165.75 CAD
  • Affirm award of 7000 CAD for wrongful dismissal