View cases - Stewart McKelvey

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIACitation: Sharecare Homes Inc. v. Cormier, 2010 NSSC 252Between:Sharecare Homes Incorporatedv.Date: 20100629Docket: Hfx. No. 308173Registry: HalifaxApplicant2010 NSSC 252 (CanLII)Catherine CormierRespondentJudge:Heard:The Honourable Associate Chief Justice Deborah K. SmithJuly 7 th , 2009 in Halifax, Nova ScotiaFinal Written By the Applicant: April 20 th , 2010Submissions: By the Respondent: April 16 th , 2010Counsel:David G. Coles, Q.C. and Rebecca L. Hiltz LeBlancfor the ApplicantLisa Richards for the Respondent
Page 1 and 2:
CITATION: Brito v. Canac Kitchens,
Page 3 and 4:
Page: 3a) What, if any, period of n
Page 5 and 6:
Page: 5[18] Having regard for Canac
Page 7 and 8:
CITATION: Chandran v. National Bank
Page 9 and 10:
Page: 3against him by the employees
Page 11 and 12:
Page: 5the employees who raised the
Page 13 and 14:
Page: 7had no obligation under the
Page 15 and 16:
Page: 9[37] Mr. Chandran’s last j
Page 17 and 18:
Page: 11large number of unsolicited
Page 19 and 20:
Page: 13disciplinary letter against
Page 21 and 22:
Page: 15evidence of acrimony betwee
Page 23 and 24:
Page: 17Toronto office. He admitted
Page 25 and 26:
Page: 19increase in the quantum of
Page 27 and 28:
Page: 21Weissach Motors and MCL Mot
Page 29 and 30:
Page: 23“There can be no catalogu
Page 31 and 32:
Page: 25[123] On the basis of the a
Page 33 and 34:
QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWANDat
Page 35 and 36:
- 3 -meet his financial obligations
Page 37 and 38:
- 5 -[11] On June 28, 2002, without
Page 39 and 40:
- 7 -and a capital gain of $23,874.
Page 41 and 42:
- 9 -may have delayed commencement
Page 43 and 44:
- 11 -had purchased late in 2001 an
Page 45 and 46:
- 13 -[34] Stated in another way, w
Page 47 and 48:
- 15 -supervised by the plaintiff.
Page 49 and 50:
- 17 -purchasing agent for a compan
Page 51 and 52:
- 19 -sales, conducting retail sale
Page 53 and 54:
- 21 -employment with Bennett Dunlo
Page 55 and 56:
- 23 -[54] The issue was taken up b
Page 57 and 58:
- 25 -59 ... Damages attributable t
Page 59 and 60:
- 27 -not have any information rega
Page 61 and 62:
- 29 -[66] Both Mr. Coppola and Mr.
Page 63 and 64:
- 31 -expense accounts which contai
Page 65 and 66:
- 33 -by the plaintiffs in the abov
Page 67 and 68:
- 35 -Pre-judgment interest[76] Mr.
Page 69 and 70:
- 37 -the six month notice period.
Page 71 and 72:
SummaryFollowing concerns raised by
Page 73 and 74:
2REASONS FOR DECISIONIntroduction[1
Page 75 and 76:
4agreed statement) and also by test
Page 77 and 78:
6e. that it was not his responsibil
Page 79 and 80:
8Department of Labour. The firm adv
Page 81 and 82:
10that “the buck stopped with me
Page 83 and 84:
12without any knowledge of this and
Page 85 and 86:
14[41] Various other cases, cited i
Page 87 and 88:
16[49] There is nothing wrong with
Page 89 and 90:
182 The foundation of this Act is t
Page 91 and 92:
20(b) the co-operative auditing of
Page 93 and 94:
- 2 -The Honourable Justice Turnbul
Page 95 and 96:
- 2 -concluded that, while the mill
Page 97 and 98:
- 4 -[6] The union’s position is
Page 99 and 100:
- 6 -it must be reasonable; (3) it
Page 101 and 102:
- 8 -the majority relied in part on
Page 103 and 104:
- 10 -Taken with the low testing ra
Page 105 and 106:
- 12 -should depart from those prec
Page 107 and 108:
- 14 -IV.Issues - AnalysisA. Introd
Page 109 and 110:
- 16 -distinguished any analogy bet
Page 111 and 112:
- 18 -industry. The lead case appea
Page 113 and 114:
- 20 -rather than a reactive, appro
Page 115 and 116:
- 22 -employers of the burden of de
Page 117 and 118:
- 24 -Canada, Local 0004, supra. Al
Page 119 and 120:
- 26 -C. Summary Observations on th
Page 121 and 122:
- 28 -hazardous materials to variou
Page 123 and 124:
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF
Page 125 and 126:
2assistance and remain employed. Ki
Page 127 and 128:
4a) there is a strong prima facie c
Page 129 and 130:
6discrimination. The letter also st
Page 131 and 132:
8applicable guidelines. He was give
Page 133 and 134:
10Correct Legal Test[15] Killam’s
Page 135 and 136:
12position. However, because of the
Page 137 and 138:
Page: 2FACTS[2] The respondent is a
Page 139 and 140:
Page: 4REASONS OF THE APPLICATION J
Page 141 and 142:
Page: 6trade, certain of such coven
Page 143 and 144:
Page: 8[17] It is convenient to rep
Page 145 and 146:
Page: 10duties for the Company or w
Page 147 and 148:
Page: 12[30] Effectively, because t
Page 149 and 150:
SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIACitatio
Page 151 and 152:
Page: 341. In every proceeding comm
Page 153 and 154:
Page: 5[8] There is ample case auth
Page 155 and 156:
Page: 7some amount be awarded for p
Page 157 and 158:
NOTE: This document is subject to e
Page 159 and 160:
2011 SCC 20File No.: 32968.2009: De
Page 161 and 162:
allowed the appeal and declared the
Page 163 and 164:
established. There is no concrete e
Page 165 and 166:
Section 5 of the AEPA, correctly in
Page 167 and 168:
pursue, rather than protecting the
Page 169 and 170:
expression under s. 2(b), so too sh
Page 171 and 172:
Nor did invoking Charter values in
Page 173 and 174:
Per Deschamps J.: The holding in He
Page 175 and 176:
from the legislation was unequivoca
Page 177 and 178:
KMart Canada Ltd., [1999] 2 S.C.R.
Page 179 and 180:
By Abella J. (dissenting)Health Ser
Page 181 and 182:
Adams, Roy J. “Prospects for Labo
Page 183 and 184:
International Labour Organisation.
Page 185 and 186:
Gaétan Migneault and Michelle Brun
Page 187 and 188:
TABLE OF CONTENTSParagraphReasons o
Page 189 and 190:
(b) Qualitative Differences Between
Page 191 and 192:
yThe judgment of McLachlin C.J. and
Page 193 and 194:
majority of this Court found a brea
Page 195 and 196:
[10] The UFCW also attempted to bar
Page 197 and 198:
[14] With respect to the particular
Page 199 and 200:
employees from a collective bargain
Page 201 and 202:
and to realize common purposes” (
Page 203 and 204:
(b) Dunmore[26] This Court’s deci
Page 205 and 206:
support discredited the organizing
Page 207 and 208:
[34] Dunmore established that claim
Page 209 and 210:
[38] The decision in Health Service
Page 211 and 212:
[42] The Court in Health Services e
Page 213 and 214:
impugned law or state action has th
Page 215 and 216:
[51] In our view, the majority deci
Page 217 and 218:
Indeed, the fact that Health Servic
Page 219 and 220:
[64] Consistent with this framework
Page 221 and 222:
must not depart from the context of
Page 223 and 224:
ealize common purposes (emphasis ad
Page 225 and 226:
LeBel J., written on behalf of a mi
Page 227 and 228:
(ix) The Argument on Academic Criti
Page 229 and 230:
given a generous and purposive inte
Page 231 and 232:
trade unions should negotiate in go
Page 233 and 234:
[101] Sections 5(6) and (7) are cri
Page 235 and 236:
[107] These considerations lead us
Page 237 and 238:
protections would be inappropriate
Page 239 and 240:
3. Does s. 3(b.1) of the Labour Rel
Page 241 and 242:
of s. 2(d) employers “must engage
Page 243 and 244:
per Dickson C.J. in dissent; R. v.
Page 245 and 246:
3. A prior decision that creates un
Page 247 and 248:
[137] Professor Debra Parkes has su
Page 249 and 250:
[140] In the case of Health Service
Page 251 and 252:
[145] Third, the constitutionalizat
Page 253 and 254:
“recognized that under most Canad
Page 255 and 256:
constitutionalize collective bargai
Page 257 and 258:
[159] In addition, the Court was ag
Page 259 and 260:
or effect of a measure when determi
Page 261 and 262:
. . . the state must not substantia
Page 263 and 264:
[173] First, the collective bargain
Page 265 and 266:
ight to bargain because employers a
Page 267 and 268:
incapable of being performed by an
Page 269 and 270:
(2) Section 2(d) Protects Freedoms
Page 271 and 272:
[193] The Chief Justice and LeBel J
Page 273 and 274:
as described in Health Services, it
Page 275 and 276:
[204] Health Services rejected the
Page 277 and 278:
associations must receive identical
Page 279 and 280:
Health Services would in fact be co
Page 281 and 282:
[217] In response to this argument,
Page 283 and 284:
The question at stake in this appea
Page 285 and 286:
constitutional law the particular f
Page 287 and 288:
can, then we must seriously questio
Page 289 and 290:
[235] The labour history offered in
Page 291 and 292:
[241] It is true that there is a lo
Page 293 and 294:
understanding of freedom of associa
Page 295 and 296:
The voluntary nature of collective
Page 297 and 298:
equirements it finds to the case be
Page 299 and 300:
exclusivity and a mechanism for res
Page 301 and 302:
takes time before the unworkability
Page 303 and 304: argain in good faith change these m
Page 305 and 306: employee, to make a “take it or l
Page 307 and 308: obligations, and Charter values —
Page 309 and 310: [279] Nonetheless, the Chief Justic
Page 311 and 312: [283] It is true, as my colleagues
Page 313 and 314: They base their view on a statement
Page 315 and 316: . . . the freedom to work for the e
Page 317 and 318: case at bar (2008 ONCA 760, 92 O.R.
Page 319 and 320: [302] As the majority in the instan
Page 321 and 322: [305] All that was required by the
Page 323 and 324: ound” by s. 2(d) seems to have be
Page 325 and 326: to Bargain Collectively: The Implic
Page 327 and 328: cases in which the vulnerability of
Page 329 and 330: [323] The AEPA was enacted in 2002
Page 331 and 332: 10-1920; Donald D. Carter et al., L
Page 333 and 334: Agriculture and Food, the Honourabl
Page 335 and 336: activities of the “employees’ a
Page 337 and 338: [346] The reason for the protection
Page 339 and 340: [351] I acknowledge that different
Page 341 and 342: May 813, does “not differ in any
Page 343 and 344: argaining, including exclusivity, b
Page 345 and 346: accordance with a bargaining regime
Page 347 and 348: 5. (1) The employer shall give an e
Page 349 and 350: Solicitor for the intervener the At
Page 351 and 352: CLIENT UPDATELABOUR & EMPLOYMENT LA
Page 370 and 371: Page: 2By the Court:[1] This matter
Page 372 and 373: Page: 4Company’s employees which,
Page 374 and 375: Page: 6(2) Ms. Cormier, having misr
Page 376 and 377: Page: 8approached the hearing and m
Page 378 and 379: Page: 10(c) any enactment set out i
Page 380 and 381: Page: 12effect, ignore the provisio
Page 382 and 383: Page: 14lacks expertise. The third
Page 384 and 385: Page: 16[36] More recently, the Ont
Page 386 and 387: 2 The purpose of this Act is to rev
Page 388 and 389: Page: 20which the Court dealt, inte
Page 390 and 391: Page: 22and fact) provided that the
Page 392 and 393: Page: 248(c) of the Act (or s. 49(1
Page 394 and 395: Page: 26(b)the importance of the ma
Page 396 and 397: , ".-42EXHIBITSPIClaimant's exhib
Page 398 and 399: . ...4premise on which the parties
Page 400 and 401: ..6Community Services and residents
Page 402 and 403: ..~.,8information in relation to th
Page 404 and 405:
."10Mr. Nordqvist testified that pr
Page 406 and 407:
". '. '.12The Company has acknowled
Page 408 and 409:
14but did acknowledge that at the t
Page 410 and 411:
16The new arrangements for Mr. Fagb
Page 412 and 413:
· .18On redirect, Mr. Fagbile test
Page 414 and 415:
'.Mr. Gilpin never met Ms. Carter a
Page 416 and 417:
· ..22Mr. Nordqvist testified that
Page 418 and 419:
• "V." . '.24The Company says tha
Page 420 and 421:
, ,. '.26After giving the evidence
Page 422 and 423:
· ., ....28had been dealing with M
Page 424 and 425:
, >30While the time commitment was
Page 426 and 427:
32The space used was in the open an
Page 428 and 429:
'.34Mr. Nordqvist acknowledged on c
Page 430 and 431:
· ..36Whoever may have caused the
Page 432 and 433:
38On at least some occasions, Mr. N
Page 434 and 435:
."40that was in the contemplation o
Page 436:
, • 425. I award interest onthe t
show all

View cases - Stewart McKelvey

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?