As an Executive Director, there are many different areas that need your attention on a daily basis: strategic direction, fundraising, stakeholder engagement, employee and volunteer management, media relations and grant applications, just to name a few.
With all of these factors to manage, keeping up with changes in legal compliance and CRA requirements may not be perceived as a top priority. However, failing to pay attention to compliance can leave your organization vulnerable to the risk of financial penalties and have a negative impact on your reputation.
I want to highlight a couple of recent issues you may want to consider.
One of the most common complaints employment lawyers hear from workers who have just lost their jobs is that they don’t know why they were fired. Many become even more aggravated when they ask for a reason and are told ‘we don’t have to give you one.’ Unsurprisingly, this type of response can often result in the now ex-employee imagining all kinds of innovative rationales as to explain their dismissal.
In Sattva Capital Corp. v. Creston Moly Corp., 2014 SCC 53 (Sattva), released August 1, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the historical approach and held that contractual interpretation involves questions of mixed fact and law rather than pure questions of law. As a result, leave to appeal from an arbitral award interpreting a contract should not have been granted. The Court also reaffirmed the contextual approach to contractual interpretation and explained the role of surrounding circumstances in contractual interpretation.