Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 425, 2005 SCC 70, 2005 SCC 70 (2005)

Extract

---

Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 425, 2005 SCC 70, 2005 SCC 70 (2005)

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

Citation: Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 425, 2005 SCC 70

Date: 20051124

Docket: 30090

Between:

Her Majesty The Queen ex rel. Linda Merk

Appellant and

International Association of Bridge, Structural,

Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771

Respondent

Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Abella and Charron JJ.

Reasons for Judgment:

(paras. 1 to 48)

Dissenting reasons:

(paras. 49 to 61)

Binnie J. (McLachlin C.J. and Major, LeBel, Abella and Charron JJ. concurring)

Deschamps J.

______________________________

Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771, [2005] 3 S.C.R. 425, 2005 SCC 70

Her Majesty The Queen ex rel. Linda Merk Appellant v.

International Association of Bridge, Structural,

Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771 Respondent

Indexed as: Merk v. International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 771

Neutral citation: 2005 SCC 70.

File No.: 30090.

2005: February 10; 2005: November 24.

Present: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Abella and Charron JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for saskatchewan

Labour law - Employee protection - Whistleblower - Provincial legislation providing that no employer can discharge employee who "has reported . . . to a lawful authority any activity that is or is likely to result in an offence" - Employee fired for reporting to union officials alleged financial abuse by supervisors - Whether "lawful authority" limited to persons capable of exercising authority with respect to offences - The Labour Standards Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. L-1, s. 74.

The appellant, M alleges that she was fired as bookkeeper and office manager of the respondent trade union because she blew the whistle by informing International Union of Iron Workers representatives of alleged financial misconduct committed by her immediate supervisors at Local 771. Under s. 74(1)(a) of the Saskatchewan Labour Standards Act, no employer can discharge an employee because the employee "has reported . . . to a lawful authority any activity that is or is likely to result in an offence". While the trial judge was satisfied that the financial misconduct amounted to "an offence" and that M was terminated because she reported it, she nevertheless concluded that M had not complained to a "lawful authority". In her view the expression "lawful authority" should be limited to a person or institution authorized by law to deal with the activity as an offence and did not include employers. Both the summary conviction appeal judge and the majority of the Court of Appeal agreed with the interpretation of "lawful authority" adopted by the trial judge.

Held (Deschamps J. dissenting): The appeal should be allowed and a conviction entered.

Per McLachlin C.J. and Major, Binnie, LeBel, Abella and Charron JJ.: The expression "lawful...

See the full content of this document

If you are already a vLex customer, access here

---