Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Ontario Court of Appeal awarded the respondents costs of the appeal and varied the motion judge’s costs order, reducing both awards by 25% to reflect divided success.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of an RCMP grievance decision, finding the delay in a transfer was not reasonably explained and the policy interpretation lacked justification.
The Court held the CIRB's refusal to reopen was reasonable because the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in disclosing the agreement as a new fact; accordingly the application for judicial review was dismissed without addressing the underlying question of jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
The Commission failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the Appellant's conduct was wilful or that he knew or should have known his communications with the payroll company would likely result in dismissal; the employer did not adequately warn the Appellant nor sufficiently investigate the payroll company's complaint, so the dismissal was not for misconduct and the Appellant is not disqualified from EI benefits.
Source excerpt
Judicial review dismissed. The Court held the Labour Relations Board reasonably declared Sobeys and five FreshCo franchisees a common employer under s. 38 of the Labour Relations Code.
The Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a judicial review of a Labour Relations Board reconsideration decision, finding no procedural unfairness or patent unreasonableness.
The Court of Appeal quashed Okanagan College’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding the arbitration award turned on a fact-driven application of the Potash bona fide plan test.
The appellant had just cause because he would imminently have been required to participate in falsifying records and otherwise contravene TSSA regulations implicating him in dangerous and unlawful conduct; he had already raised concerns with the employer, there was no effective internal or union remedy given the workplace context, contacting TSSA was undertaken contemporaneously and other suggested alternatives were not reasonable, therefore he had no reasonable alternative to quitting and is not disqualified from EI benefits.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal applied the 'arguable relevance' standard and proportionality: it ordered targeted disclosure because the requested vacation and scheduling records and limited vacancy/turnover data had a rational connection to K.L.’s claim that there would have been ongoing work for a Relief Supervisor and could rebut Canada Post’s non-discriminatory explanation; it refused broad corporate KPI data, APOC benefits beyond what is already disclosed, and extensive HR complaint/grievance histories because those requests were overbroad, speculative, privacy-intrusive, or would require creation of new…
Source excerpt
The appellant voluntarily initiated the separation by refusing to attend the March 28 meeting after an extended absence; because he had a reasonable alternative (attending the meeting to discuss facts and job status) he did not have just cause to leave and is therefore disqualified from EI benefits.
Source excerpt
Explore more
