Offices in Ottawa and Perth
(613) 722-1500

CONTACT US (613) 722-1500

Suspending an Employee Indefinitely Without Pay May Amount to Constructive Dismissal

Suspending an Employee Indefinitely Without Pay May Amount to Constructive Dismissal

By:

Mann Lawyers

Posted March 6, 2015

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision today in Potter v. New Brunswick Legal Aid Services Commission overturning both the Trial Court and Court of Appeal decisions that David Potter had voluntarily resigned from his position.

The fact that two lower courts concluded that Mr. Potter had resigned while the Supreme Court of Canada disagreed and decided that he had been constructively dismissed is emblematic of how difficult it can be to anticipate whether a constructive dismissal claim will be successful.

The Supreme Court did try to provide some clarity by articulating the following two part test for constructive dismissal:

  1. The court must first identify an express or implied contract term that has been breached
  2. Then the court must determine whether that breach was sufficiently serious to constitute constructive dismissal.

The Supreme Court added however that an employer’s conduct will also constitute constructive dismissal if it more generally shows that the employer did not intend to be bound by the contract. The decision also confirms that courts ought to continue using a ‘flexible approach’ in answering that question. While this flexibility allows courts to assess each case on its facts, I anticipate that this same flexibility will mean employees and their counsel will continue to approach alleging constructive dismissal with some caution.
The decision does however highlight some factors which will weigh in favour of a finding of constructive dismissal, among the ones the Supreme Court of Canada relied on in order to conclude that Potter had been constructively dismissed include:

  1. The employee’s contract did not contain the right (express or implied) to suspend the employee;
  2. Potter was not given any reason for his suspension;
  3. Potter’s suspension was indefinite and he was replaced during the period of suspension; and
  4. Potter did not agree to the change.

To read the full decision please go here.

More Resources

Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 

Posted November 28, 2023

As a lawyer who has worked in the field of Wills and Estates for the last three years, I get the following question quite a[...]
Blog |
Family Law
By: 
Amongst the profession, we often refer to domestic contracts prepared by the parties themselves without legal advice as “kitchen table agreements”. In May 2023, the[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 

Posted November 7, 2023

What is a Power of Attorney document? A Power of Attorney is a legal document that authorizes someone else, known as your “attorney” to act[...]
Blog |
Real Estate
By: 

Posted November 6, 2023

If you enter into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale to buy a new build home, your offer could be conditional on having your lawyer[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 
Do I need a Will? A short answer is most likely. If you possess assets of value, such as chequing or savings accounts, investments, a[...]
Blog |
Real Estate
By: 

Posted October 31, 2023

The Status Certificate is a document written by a condominium corporation that discloses certain financial, governance, and legal information about the condominium corporation and a[...]

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

"*" indicates required fields

Name*
Consent*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.