Skip to Content


Ontario court urges "business transaction" exemption be added to PIPEDA, grants order for disclosure

Jurisdiction: - Canada/Federal - Ontario

In the Matter of an Application Under Rules 14.05(3)(d), 2012 ONSC 2530, a decision issued on April 26, 2012, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted an order allowing the vendor financial institution to disclose personal information to the purchaser, pursuant to an asset purchase transaction.

In doing so, the court urged, effectively, for the implementation of "business transaction" provisions such as those found in the BC and Alberta PIPAs, stating:

It is evident from this long list of cases that Farley J. was prescient in suggesting that "this type of situation should be addressed to avoid unnecessary court applications."  I join Farley J. in urging that a route be provided that will permit the disclosure of the necessary personal information in such circumstances as these to avoid wasting the court's time and the parties' funds (at para. 12).  read more »

Supreme Court of Canada will not hear appeal of Roman Catholic priest's unsuccessful constructive dismissal claim

Jurisdiction: - Ontario
Sector: - Religion

The Supreme Court of Canada announced on May 17, 2012 that the application for leave to appeal in Hart v. Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Kingston was dismissed without costs, meaning the top court won't hear the case.

In a decision issued on November 22, 2011 -Hart v. Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Kingston, in Canada, 2011 ONCA 728 - the Ontario Court of Appeal ("ONCA") had ruled that the court did not have jurisdiction over the priest's constructive dismissal claim, upholding the decision of the Ontario Superior Court.

Specifically, the ONCA stated:  read more »

Ontario HR Tribunal dismisses human rights application where employee also filed wrongful dismissal court claim

Jurisdiction: - Ontario

In Jarrett v. Vance, 2012 HRTO 24, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal dismissed a human rights application where the employee had also filed a wrongful dismissal claim in court.

In reaching this decision, the Tribunal stated:

I am satisfied that the applicant's Statement of Claim and this Application are based on the same facts and that both assert the same type of allegations, as well as seek similar remedies. In fact, the applicant's narrative in both the Application and the Statement of Claim are virtually identical. While the Statement of Claim makes no explicit reference to the Code, it is clear that the applicant's allegations concern the same events that are alleged to constitute discrimination and reprisal in the Application and that both assert the same rights with respect to unfair dismissal and failure to provide work  read more »

Ontario Court of Appeal recognizes tort of invasion of personal privacy in case involving two BMO employees

Jurisdiction: - Ontario

In a decision issued on January 18, 2012 - Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 - the Ontario Court of Appeal recognized the tort of invasion of personal privacy in case involving two BMO employees.

The court then awarded $10,000 in damages to the employee whose privacy has been breached.

For more background on this case, see my May 9, 2011 post here: "Ontario Court of Appeal to consider tort of invasion of privacy in work context case".

Andrew Pinto issues Consultation Paper in review of Ontario Human Rights system

Jurisdiction: - Ontario

On August 12, 2011, the Attorney General of Ontario appointed Andrew Pinto to conduct a review of the Ontario Human Rights system as required under section 57 of the Ontario Human Rights Code. Mr. Pinto has now issued this Consultation Paper.

Dismissal for just cause referred to as the "capital punishment" of employment law

Jurisdiction: - Ontario
Sector: - Manufacturing

In this passage in Plester v. Polyone Canada Inc., 2011 ONSC 6068, the court stated that just cause dismissals have been referred to as the "capital punishment" of Canadian employment law:

[32]           The law of employment in Canada requires employers to provide adequate notice before dismissing an employee. Where the employer wishes to dismiss n employee summarily, on the basis of misconduct, the onus is on the employer to show just cause.  read more »