Cain v. Roluf's Ltd., (1998) 55 O.T.C. 65 (GD)

• Judge: Métivier, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: February 25, 1998
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1998), 55 O.T.C. 65 (GD)

Cain v. Roluf's Ltd. (1998), 55 O.T.C. 65 (GD)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] O.T.C. TBEd. MR.074

Suzanne Cain (plaintiff) v. Roluf's Limited (Roluf's Camera Centre) (defendant)

(8762/96)

Indexed As: Cain v. Roluf's Ltd.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Belleville

Métivier, J.

February 25, 1998.

Summary:

The plaintiff, who worked for the defendant for 11 years was dismissed. She sued for damages for wrongful dismissal. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff was dismissed for cause in that she was chronically absent or late, and that overall, her conduct exhibited a dereliction of duty.

The Ontario Court (General Division) agreed that the plaintiff was habitually absent or late and that generally, the plaintiff's conduct exhibited a dereliction of duty. Nonetheless, the court allowed the plaintiff's claim where the defendant was deemed by its actions to have condoned the conduct. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to 10 months' notice, however this amount was reduced by six months because of the plaintiff's failure to mitigate.

Master and Servant - Topic 7523

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Condonation - See paragraphs 1 to 37.

Master and Servant - Topic 7560

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Absenteeism or tardiness - See paragraphs 1 to 37.

Master and Servant - Topic 8000

Dismissal without cause - Notice of dismissal - Reasonable notice - What constitutes - See paragraphs 1 to 42.

Master and Servant - Topic 8064

Dismissal without cause - Damages - Mitigation - See paragraphs 38 to 41.

Cases Noticed:

Wilson v. Alport et al. (1991), 98 Sask.R. 31; 38 C.C.E.L. 218 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 28].

Cardenas v. Canada Dry Ltd. (1985), 10 C.C.E.L. 1 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 33].

McIntyre v. Hockin (1889), 16 O.A.R. 498, refd to. [para. 34].

Bardal v. Globe and Mail Ltd., [1960] O.W.N. 253; 24 D.L.R.(2d) 140 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 36].

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd. (1997), 219 N.R. 161; 123 Man.R.(2d) 1; 159 W.A.C. 1 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

Counsel:

Michael J. Pretsell, for the plaintiff;

Carol F. Quirt, for the defendant.

This action was heard at Belleville, Ontario, on November 12 and 13, 1997, before Métivier, J., of the Ontario Court (General Division), who delivered the following judgment on February 25, 1998.