View cases - Stewart McKelvey

38On at least some occasions, Mr. Nordqvist would ask for names ofpeople getting paid cash and Ms.Cormier would tell him. It was his evidence that he could not identify from some ofthe chequeswhat the money was for. He testified that he had never seen Ms. Cormier's payroll book.When Mr. Nordqvist would ask Ms. Cormier about the cheques, she would say that the details werein the payroll book, but he never asked to see it or for any further details because Ms. Cormier wasbis partner and that was her job.Mrs. Nordqvist testified that she never looked at the cheques that were being written byMs. Cormieras that was a matter between Mr. Nordqvist and Ms. Cormier, and she trusted that they were doingtheir thing.2010 NSSC 252 (CanLII)Mrs. Nordqvist testified that they had an informal relationship with Ms. Cormier, that they werealways concerned about the cash being written because they were not able to get T4 slips to supporttheir claim, and she knew that Ms. Cormier and Mr. Nordqvist were working on it.The Company argue that the information recorded on the cheques did not accurately identify whatthe cheques were for and this was a further example ofincorrect record keeping by Ms. Cormier.The evidence did not establish that this was a practice which the Company had made clear to Ms.Cormier that it had to stop or disciplinary action would be taken. Indeed the evidence did tend toshow that to the extent that Ms. Cormier continued the practice following the Revenue Canadaaudits, that was known to the company and no efforts were made to advise Ms. Cormier to cease thepractice. No efforts were made because ofa grudging acknowledgement that they were still neededand this was an area to be looked after by Ms. Cormier.SUMMARYThe evidence shows that the Nordqvists permitted Ms. Cormier wide latitude ofdiscretion as to howto carry out her employment responsibilities. Prior to making the decision to terminate they had not