Canada Case Law

Munjaral v. Brar

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Viewed in its full factual matrix the plaintiff's claims arise from workplace complaints, the employer's investigative process and the resulting termination and are therefore in their essential character disputes governed by the Collective Agreement and the Labour Relations Code; because exclusive arbitral jurisdiction applies, the Court lacks jurisdiction, and the actions are an abuse of process and must be struck with no leave to amend.

Source excerpt

• Exclusive arbitral jurisdiction
• Weber two‑step analysis
• Abuse of process
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Leave to amend
• Summary dismissal

Read case analysis

Ramachandran v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the Board's interpretation as reasonable and entitled to deference under Vavilov: 'governed by performance pay' means having predominant or determinative control, and because Appendix A prescribes lockstep pay progression for LP-00 to LP-03 and in-range performance increases for LP-01 to LP-03 are small, the LP-02 salary is not governed by performance pay; therefore the Board correctly dismissed the grievance and the application is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Collective agreement interpretation
• Performance pay
• Salary placement
• Standard of review
• Deference to specialized tribunal

Read case analysis

Gentleman v. Kings (County)

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction because the essential character of the dispute—the municipality's decision to terminate a probationary employee in a bargaining unit—arose out of the Collective Agreement and therefore fell within the exclusive arbitration scheme mandated by the Trade Union Act s.42 and the Collective Agreement; arbitration provided effective redress and there was no basis to invoke the court's residual jurisdiction.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Weber doctrine
• Probationary dismissal
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Residual court jurisdiction
• Effective redress

Read case analysis

R.W. Tomlinson Limited v. Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 527

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal held R.W. Tomlinson had to arbitrate its dispute, but non-party corporate claims could proceed in Superior Court and were stayed pending arbitration.

• Arbitral jurisdiction
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Temporary stay of proceedings
• Non-party claims
• Picketing and torts
• Weber doctrine

Read case analysis

SH v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

On the balance of probabilities the appellant voluntarily left employment and had reasonable alternatives at the time (remain in existing job or seek other employment); therefore he did not establish just cause under s.29(c) of the EI Act and is disqualified from EI benefits.

Source excerpt

• Voluntary leaving
• Just cause
• Disqualification from benefits
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Duty to seek alternative employment

Read case analysis

Weston v. School District No. 22 (Vernon)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Court struck wage-loss and union-representation claims for lack of jurisdiction and abuse of process, finding they belonged to the Labour Relations Board.

• Jurisdiction of courts vs labour board
• Abuse of process
• Duty of fair representation
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Grievance settlement enforcement
• Leave to amend pleadings

Read case analysis

Sunrise Poultry Processors Ltd. v. Aujla

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On a chambers application, the court held Sunrise Poultry’s claim over alleged time-theft arose from the collective agreement and fell within exclusive labour jurisdiction.

• Exclusive jurisdiction of labour tribunals
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Arbitration
• Weber analysis
• Grievance procedure
• Duty of fidelity

Read case analysis

Daggett v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an SST Appeal Division decision refusing leave to appeal an EI misconduct finding tied to Canada Post’s vaccination attestation policy.

• Misconduct under the employment insurance act
• Vaccine mandate and employer policy
• Jurisdictional limits of tribunal
• Bias allegation
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Employment-insurance-misconduct

Read case analysis

AP v Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Court

Social Security Tribunal of Canada

The Commission failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the appellant's loss of employment was wilful misconduct because the appellant credibly believed, supported by the collective agreement and union correspondence, that he was exempt from availability requirements to complete a mandatory university internship, and his absence was not reckless or deliberate misconduct.

Source excerpt

• Misconduct
• Collective agreement interpretation
• Student employee leave
• Disqualification from ei benefits

Read case analysis

Unifor Marine Workers Federation, Local 1 v. Halifax Shipyard

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The arbitrator reasonably applied established principles of collective agreement interpretation and Vavilov reasonableness review: Article 14.08 does not mention "early starts" while Article 14.09 does, extrinsic evidence was equivocal and did not establish a contractual entitlement, and the Union failed to show clear and unequivocal language requiring double time for early starts; therefore the arbitration award dismissing the grievance was reasonable and is upheld.

Source excerpt

• Collective agreement interpretation
• Overtime pay
• Standard of review (vavilov)
• Burden of proof for monetary benefits

Read case analysis