• First Reference
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Blog Signup 📨

First Reference Talks

Discussions on Human Resources, Employment Law, Payroll and Internal Controls

  • Home
  • About
  • Archives
  • Conference
  • Resources
  • Buy Policies

Honda Canada Inc. v Keays

By Alison J. Bird | 3 Minutes Read January 14, 2013

When will an employer be liable for bad faith damages?

Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Honda v. Keays, dismissed employees have increasingly sought bad faith damages in severance negotiations and wrongful dismissal actions. A key issue in these claims is whether the employer’s conduct was sufficiently egregious to justify these damages. The courts are clear that not every perceived offence or instance of misconduct will give rise to a finding of bad faith.

Article by Alison J. Bird / Employee Relations, Employment Standards, Payroll / bad faith damages, damages, deprive the employee of a benefit, dismissed employees, employer’s conduct was sufficiently egregious, employment law, employment relationship, Evans v. Complex Services Inc, evidence of mental distress, Honda Canada Inc. v Keays, liable for bad faith damages, malice or blatant disregard for the employee, management and the employee, misrepresenting the reason for the termination, must still establish actual loss caused by the misconduct, perceived offence or instance of misconduct, severance negotiations, Supreme Court of Canada, termination, termination notice, terminations, time of dismissal, wrongful dismissal actions

By Rudner Law, Employment / HR Law & Mediation | 6 Minutes Read October 6, 2011

Widespread confusion on how courts determine the amount of notice of dismissal

As I and others have frequently commented, there is widespread confusion and misunderstanding regarding how our courts determine the amount of notice of dismissal (sometimes referred to as "severance") an employee is entitled to. The recent decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench in Coppola v. Capital Pontiac Buick Cadillac GMC Ltd. provides a fairly thorough analysis.

Article by Rudner Law, Employment / HR Law & Mediation / Employment Standards, Payroll / amount of notice of dismissal, Bardal v. The Globe & Mail Ltd., Coppola v. Capital Pontiac Buick Cadillac GMC Ltd., Dismissal, employment law, Hall v. Canadian Corporate Management Co., Honda Canada Inc. v Keays, Issacs v. MHG International Ltd., length of notice period, length of notice requirements, length of service, lengthier notice periods, McNevan v. AmeriCredit Corp, notice of dismissal, period of reasonable notice, reasonable notice, reasonable notice of termination, severance, termination

By Rudner Law, Employment / HR Law & Mediation | 4 Minutes Read September 1, 2010

Update on damages arising out of bad faith in the course of dismissal: Soost vs. Merrill Lynch Canada Inc.

The Court of Appeal in Alberta has just ruled that there was no basis to award "The Damages Formerly Known as Wallace" in Soost v. Merrill Lynch Canada Inc., dramatically reducing the value of the award.

Article by Rudner Law, Employment / HR Law & Mediation / Employment Standards / bad faith, bad faith damages, canadian employment law, Court of Appeal in Alberta, damages arising out of bad faith in the course of dismissal, Dismissal, employment law, Honda Canada Inc. v Keays, just cause for dismissal, moral damages, punitive damages, Soost v. Merrill Lynch Canada Inc., terminations, The Damages Formerly Known as Wallace, Wallace damages, wrongful dismissal, wrongful dismissal claim

Footer

About us

Established in 1995, First Reference is the leading publisher of up to date, practical and authoritative HR compliance and policy databases that are essential to ensure organizations meet their due diligence and duty of care requirements.

First Reference Talks

  • Home
  • About
  • Archives
  • Conference
  • Resources
  • Buy Policies

Main Menu

  • About First Reference
  • Resources
  • Contact us
  • 1 800 750 8175

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

We welcome your comments on our blog articles. However, we do not respond to specific legal questions in this space.
We do not provide any form of legal advice or legal opinion. Please consult a lawyer in your jurisdiction or try one of our products.


Copyright © 2009 - 2022 · First Reference Inc. · All Rights Reserved
Legal and Copyright Notices · Publisher's Disclaimer · Privacy Policy · Accessibility Policy