Purchase This Domain

Labour and employment — Wrongful dismissal — Termination of employment — Whether the respondent was wrongfully dismissed or voluntarily retired — Employer provided written notice of termination citing shortage of work and issued a record of employment — Trial judge’s finding of termination without cause upheld — Governing principles for determining wrongful dismissal and voluntary resignationTorts — Mitigation of damages — Duty to mitigate — Whether the respondent failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate damages — Trial judge deducted 3 months for lack of reasonable mitigation — Appellant failed to prove that reasonable efforts would have resulted in mitigating employment — Governing rule from Lake v. La Presse, 2022 ONCA 742Torts — Mitigation of damages — Part-time employment — Whether the respondent was obligated to accept part-time employment with the appellant — Trial judge found no concrete offer of part-time work — No breach of duty to mitigate established — Governing principles for assessing mitigation obligations in employment lawObligations — Damages — Calculation errors — Whether the trial judge made a mathematical error in calculating damages — Trial judge double-counted the deduction for actual notice of termination — Damages recalculated to correct the error, increasing the award to $88,509.05 — Governing principles for correcting mathematical errors in damage awards

Constitution — Charter of Rights — Section 11(b) — Right to be tried within a reasonable time — Stay of proceedings granted by trial judge due to delay — Crown appeal dismissed — Did the trial judge err in concluding that last-minute trial dates did not constitute defence delay? — Application of Jordan principles to determine unreasonable delay — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(b)Rights and freedoms — Charter of Rights — Section 11(b) — Right to be tried within a reasonable time — Trial judge found case lacked sufficient complexity to invoke exceptional circumstances exception under Jordan principles — Crown appeal dismissed — Did the trial judge err in finding the case was not sufficiently complex? — Framework for assessing complexity under Jordan principles — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(b)Criminal procedure — Delay — Jordan principles — Stay of proceedings granted due to unreasonable delay — Crown appeal dismissed — Offering of earlier trial dates at the last minute not considered defence delay — Case not sufficiently complex to invoke exceptional circumstances exception — Application of Jordan framework to assess delay and complexity

Constitution — Charter of Rights — Section 11(c) — Civil contempt proceedings — Application of section 11(c) to civil contempt hearings, including sentencing — Whether civil contempt is quasi-criminal in nature, attracting Charter protections — Does section 11(c) apply to coercive and punitive contempt proceedings? — Section 11(c) prohibits compelled testimony in quasi-criminal proceedings — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(c)Rights and freedoms — Charter protections — Self-incrimination — Section 11(c) of the Charter — Whether compelling testimony in civil contempt proceedings violates the right against self-incrimination — Application of section 11(c) to sentencing — Charter protections extend to quasi-criminal proceedings until final resolution — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(c)Evidence — Compelled testimony — Use of compelled evidence in contempt proceedings — Whether compelled testimony was improperly used to establish liability and sentencing — Expert evidence based on compelled testimony — Admissibility of expert evidence in contempt hearings — Compelled testimony cannot be used to prove contempt or justify sentencing — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 11(c)Evidence — Standard of proof — Proof beyond a reasonable doubt — Contempt for failure to produce deleted data — Whether the existence of deleted data was proved beyond a reasonable doubt — Expert evidence based on supposition rather than fact — Rejection of exculpatory evidence insufficient to establish guilt — Standard of proof in contempt proceedings — Carey v. Laiken, 2015 SCC 17Civil procedure — Procedural fairness — Clarity of allegations in contempt proceedings — Whether the motion judge failed to clearly identify the third act of contempt as a separate allegation — Procedural fairness in self-represented litigant cases — Use of potentially biased expert evidence — Procedural safeguards in contempt hearings — Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, r. 60.11(4)