Sentences with phrase «upheld termination clauses»

Courts throughout the country, including the appeal courts in Ontario and British Columbia, have upheld termination clauses that did not expressly reference benefits continuation.

While there appeared to be a consensus for years that strict language was required to displace the common law without infringing on the ESA, Rose says a 2016 Ontario Court of Appeal decision dismissed an appeal from a motion judge's ruling upholding a termination clause — providing «the minimum required by the ESA» — that was linguistically sparse compared to earlier rulings.

Then the Ontario Court of Appeal in Oudin v. Centre Francophone de Toronto dismissed an appeal from a motion judge's ruling upholding a termination clause (providing «the minimum required by the ESA») that was linguistically sparse and relatively imprecise when compared to earlier rulings.

Not exact matches

That said, there have been a number of decisions in the past couple of years which have upheld arguably unlawful termination clauses in favour of employers, thus creating uncertainty for employees and a possible incentive for employers to not even meet minimum ESA requirements for severance.

In that case the termination clause at issue did not reference benefits or severance pay and was upheld with very brief reasons by the Court of Appeal.

Although the Court upheld the enforceability of this termination clause in this instance, in our view this clause is not one that employers should use as a model.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a decision regarding a termination clause in an employment agreement involving a man who accepted two - weeks notice from his employer then claimed damages saying he was wrongfully dismissed.