View cases - Stewart McKelvey

. .,'21I am also satisfied that there is no evidence that Ms. Cormier intentionally held back or mislead Mr.Gilpin as to how she had structured the arrangements. Mr. Gilpin never told her that what she wasdoing was not permitted because he was not aware ofwhat she was doing.Ms. Cormier testified that she discussed the arrangements she had made with Mr. Nordqvist and hehad no problems. She told him about her separate business number and that Mr. Fagbile was aforeign worker and that she had discussed the way to proceed with Mr. Fagbile's lawyer.On cross examination, Ms. Cormier acknowledged that on discovery she had testified she had notdiscussed the method ofhow to deal with Mr. Fagbile, buther testimony at the hearing was that waswrong.2010 NSSC 252 (CanLII)Ms. Cormier agreed that she never told the Nordqvists that he was illegally employed, but shetestified she was not trying to hide anything. It was her evidence that the Nordqvists knew thesituation.Ms. Cormier testified that the first remittance to Revenue Canada under the new arrangement wasby a cheque found at exhibit PI tab 59. Noted on the cheque is the notation "Business Number828927475 RPOOOI S. Fagbile:P.C.W. Pepp. St. Foreign Worker Program." Itwas herevidence thatwas written on the cheque to remind Mr. Nord.qvist about the arrangement when he received thecheque back from the bank,. It was her evidence that subsequent cheques had the same notation.Ms. Cormier testified that when she was terminated, she called Colin Nordqvist to explain Mr.Fagbile's situation. She attended a meeting with Colin at the Steak and Stein Restaurant where sheexplained to him the arrangements.In 2006 aproblem arose ~rith Revenue Canada because oft.."'Ie use of!\1s. COffi1ier t s business DlLTTIber.Ms. Cormier had to deal with Colin Nordqvist to have him get a new number, which he did. TheCompany then continued with the payment arrangements using the new number.