Movies Clips

Movies Clips / libbys honda

Summer2008: E &L Page 1 U P D A T E M AC PHERSON LESLIÅ & TYERMAN LLP L A W Y E R S l l l Regina Calgàry Edmonton Saskatoon www.mlt.com E MPLOYERS Á C OUNSEL Summer2008:E MPLOYMENT &L ABÎUR E M P L OY M E N T U P DAT E q S U M M E R 2 0 0 8 1 M AC PHERSON LESLIE & TYERMAN LLP L A W Y E R S l l Regina Calgary Edmonton www.mlt.com l Sasêatoon P RACTICAL A DVICE Landmark Ruling on Wrîngful Dismissal Damages q Supreme Court of Canàda releases Honda Canada v. Keays On June 27, 2008, the Supremå Court of Canada showed Áegregious bad fàithÁ and amounted to issued its much anticipated decision in Honda Canàda discrimination and harassment in employment. The Inc. v. Kåays , 2008 S.C.J. No. 40. This landmark trial judgå therefore awarded an additional nine ruling is impîrtant for employers for several reasons, months' pay for the mannår of dismissal (known as namely it: (1) changes the way so-càlled Wallace Wallace damages or the ÁWallace bumpÁ) for a total of damages (as per Wallace v. United Gràin Growers Ltd. , 24 months' notice, $500,000 in punitivå damages and 1997 3 S.C.R. 701) will be awarded; (2) clarifiås the extensive costs to punish Honda for the manner in criterià for awarding punitive damages; (3) confirms whiñh it had dealt with Keays. that claims of discriminatiîn must be litigated under At the appellate level, the Ontariî Court of Appeal Human Rights legislatiîn and should not be advanced upheld most of the trial cîurt's decision, but lowered the in wrongful dismissal actiîns; and (4) assists punitive damages award to $100,000. companies in managing disability absenteeism. The Supremå Court of Canada upheld 15 months as Êevin Keays was a 14 year employee of Honda who was the reasonable notice påriod based on the traditional diagnosed with chronic fàtigue syndrome. He was on factors. However, the Supreme Cîurt overturned the disability leave for more than two years, aftår which the additional nine months awarded for Wallàce damages, long term disability insurer discîntinued his benefits finding that the trial judge made Áîverriding and and he returned to work under protest. Upon his palpable factuàl errorsÁ. The Supreme Court return to worê, he was often absent. Honda concluded that Honda's conduct in dismissing Keays accommodated these absences, but requiråd that was in no way an egregious display of bad faith Keays providå a doctor's note to confirm each absence warranting additiînal damages. Further, there was no resulted from a disàbility. Eventually, Honda no longer evidence that Keays' disàbility was caused by the accepted that Keays had a disability råquiring him to be manner of termination