Sentences with phrase «containing termination clauses»

It can be a costly mistake to have employees sign employment contracts containing termination clauses that have not been properly drafted.

Employment contracts containing termination clauses should be reviewed by an experienced employment lawyer.

A fairly significant percentage of employees in Toronto and the rest of Ontario have employment contracts that contain termination clauses that are silent with respect to mitigation.

As a result, employers whose employment contracts contain termination clauses should consult with an employment lawyer because their cost of terminating employees is now potentially significantly higher than before.

For example, if the employment contract does not contain a termination clause the court will find that there is an implied term in the employment contract that the contract may only be terminated by the employer without cause by providing the employee with reasonable notice of notice of dismissal.1 Express and implied terms in a contract are equivalent in effect.2

The clauses in employment contracts that are most likely to be the subject of a legal dispute between an employee and employer are: (i) the termination clause or, if the contract does not contain a termination clause the employee's entitlement to reasonable notice (ii) clauses that set out an employee's entitlement to variable compensation such a bonus, commission and / or stock options; and (iii) restrictive covenants (e.g. non-competition and / or non-solicitation clauses).

Similarly, employees who receive offers of employment that contain termination clauses and restrictive covenants should ensure that they understand what these clauses actually mean and whether or not a court is likely to enforce the clauses.

The employer has the employee sign an employment contract that contains a termination clause that will not be enforced by a court.

However, that same employee may only be entitled to 2 weeks» notice of dismissal if they had signed an employment contract containing a termination clause.

However, the right to reasonable notice can be legally removed if the employee signs an employment contract that contains a termination clause that provides the employee with a lesser amount in the event that the employee is ever dismissed.

Even someone who has only been employed for a few years can suffer a significant loss if their employment contract contains a termination clause.

If you learn that the termination clause will not be enforced, you may decide to accept the offer of employment containing the termination clause confident knowing that you will still be entitled to reasonable notice of dismissal;

The difference in the notice and severance payments available to a dismissed employee who has signed an employment contract that contains a termination clause limiting his or her entitlements to the ESA and what the employee would receive if he or she is entitled to reasonable notice can be substantial.

The Supreme Court of Canada held in Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd. 2 that if an employment contract contains a termination clause that provides an employee with an entitlement upon termination other than reasonable notice, that entitlement must be at least equal to the employee's minimum notice and severance entitlements as set out in the ESA.

In Ontario approximately 30 % of employment contracts contain termination clauses that will not be enforced by a court because the clauses have not been properly drafted.

This is established by having the future employee sign an employment contract that contains a termination clause that either sets out a different notice period or provides a formula for calculating the employee's notice period at the time of dismissal.

The Supreme Court of Canada held in Machtinger v. HOJ Industries Ltd5 that if an employment contract contains a termination clause that provides an employee with an entitlement upon termination other than reasonable notice, that entitlement must be at least equal to the employee's entitlement pursuant to the ESA.

A major problem faced by employers whose current employment contracts contain termination clauses silent on the subject of mitigation is that they can not simply have their current employees sign new employment contracts containing a revised termination clause.

It is now common for employers to present offers of employment that contain termination clauses that remove the employees» right to reasonable notice of dismissal.

Not exact matches

Employers can mitigate their risk by limiting what they say (as Urban Systems appeared to do in this case) and by drafting employment contracts containing clear «entire agreement» and termination clauses.

This decision runs directly contrary to Nemeth v. Hatch Ltd., 2018 ONCA 7 («Nemeth «-RRB-, wherein the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that termination clauses do not need to contain specific language to oust the common law, as long as the «intention to displace an employee's common law notice rights can be readily gleaned from the language agreed to by the parties.»

This week, in Nemeth v. Hatch Ltd., 2018 ONCA 7, the Ontario Court of Appeal («Court») clarified that termination clauses do not need to contain specific language to oust the common law, as long as the «intention to displace an employee's common law notice rights can be readily gleaned from the language agreed to by the parties.»

While the Court concluded that signing a written employment agreement the day after the employee commenced work did not render the agreement unenforceable, it found that the termination clause contained in the employment agreement improperly excluded the employee's minimum statutory entitlement to benefits continuation during the notice period.

As a result of section 5 (1), ESA, the Court of Appeal stated that where the termination clause contains «even one» violation of the ESA, the entire termination clause would be considered void and thus, unenforceable.

The number of employers who provide their employees with employment contracts containing void termination clauses is amazing.

This case therefore exemplifies the importance of implementing clear, enforceable written employment agreements containing important clauses that set out the respective rights and obligations of the employer and employee, such as clauses pertaining to probationary periods and entitlements upon termination.

This decision extended the ruling in a 2012 decision, Bowes v Goss Power Corp. which had held that where an indefinite hire contract contained a termination notice clause allowing for termination on «6 months» notice or pay in lieu» and the employer terminated without working notice, there was no duty to mitigate damages or deduction for mitigation earnings.

The terms and conditions of Ms. Stevens» employment were contained in an offer letter that included the following termination clause:

The Ontario Court of Appeal held in Howard v Benson Group Inc. 4 that an employee who has been dismissed prior to the end of the fixed term will be entitled to the wages and benefits he or she would have received to the end of the fixed term unless the employment contract contains an enforceable termination clause that specifies a pre-determined notice period in the event of early termination.

An employee will be entitled to reasonable notice of dismissal unless his or her termination clause contains an enforceable termination clause that limits his or her entitlement to the minimum set out in the ESA.

If the individual decides to accept an offer of employment that contains an enforceable termination clause the individual should at least understand what he or she is signing up for.

The agreement contained the following termination clause, which was the main issue in the dispute:

The agency contract contained a clause that elected Regulation 17 indemnity upon termination, with a proviso that the agent would get Regulation 17 compensation if that proved to -LSB-...]

Olympus Canada argued that the termination clause was contained in a new offer of employment from a new employer and was therefore binding.

Each of the five employment contracts contained a contractual clause that intended to replace the Employee's right to common law notice upon termination, with the statutory minimums, under Ontario's employment standards legislation, the Employment Standards Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 41 (the «ESA»).

Employment contracts often contain clauses limiting an employee's entitlement upon termination to the minimum entitlements under the Employment Standards Act or any other amount the employer and employee have agreed to.

Most LTC policies have a termination of coverage provision (sometimes called a «Incontestable Clause»), which allows the carrier - for up to two years after the effective date of coverage - to terminate your policy because of erroneous information or misrepresentations contained in an application.

If you are terminate your services to your client for unforeseen reasons, you would need to make a formal notification which contains the date of effect, the reasons for termination and other significant clauses, all of which can be included easily with the help of the letter of our termination of services templates.