Chadee v. Norway House First Nation et al., (1996) 113 Man.R.(2d) 110 (CA)

• Judge: Huband, Helper and Kroft, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: June 20, 1996
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1996), 113 Man.R.(2d) 110 (CA)

Chadee v. Norway House (1996), 113 Man.R.(2d) 110 (CA);

    131 W.A.C. 110

MLB headnote and full text

Sylvan Chadee (plaintiff/respondent) v. Alan James Ross, Ronnie Evans, Peter Albert, Mathew Charles Balfour, Sandy Cromarty, Douglas Keam, and Ken Albert on their behalf and on behalf of all other members of the Norway House First Nation and Norway House First Nation (defendants/appellants)

(Suit No. AI 95-30-02506)

Indexed As: Chadee v. Norway House First Nation et al.

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Huband, Helper and Kroft, JJ.A.

October 9, 1996.

Summary:

Chadee successfully sued his former employer for damages for wrongful dismissal. The employer appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Crown - Topic 1087

Contracts with Crown - Employment contracts - Power to dismiss - The Manitoba Court of Appeal stated that the Crown has the power to dismiss at pleasure, unless the Crown circumscribes its own power by legislation or regulation and probably by the terms of either an individual employment contract or a collective agreement - See paragraphs 13 to 26.

Crown - Topic 5704

Agents of Crown or government - Liability in contract - Employment contracts - Chadee was employed by the Norway House First Nation - When the employer experienced financial problems, Chadee was dismissed on one month's notice - He sued his employer for wrongful dismissal - The employer submitted that it was an agent of the Crown and was entitled to dismiss at pleasure - The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that the Norway House First Nation was not acting as agent of the Crown, where the evidence did not indicate the level of ministerial control that would lead to a conclusion that it acted as agent for the Crown - Accordingly, the defence based on the Crown's power to dismiss at pleasure failed - See paragraphs 27 to 39.

Cases Noticed:

Dunn v. R., [1896] 1 Q.B. 116 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Gould v. Stuart, [1896] A.C. 575 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 16].

Ridge v. Baldwin, [1964] A.C. 40 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 17].

McKeen v. New Brunswick (1971), 3 N.B.R.(2d) 418 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 18].

Malik v. Manitoba and Civil Service Commission (Man.) (1985), 35 Man.R.(2d) 48 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].

Wilson and Nova Scotia Government Employees' Association v. Civil Service Commission (N.S.), [1981] 1 S.C.R. 211; 35 N.R. 103; 43 N.S.R.(2d) 631; 81 A.P.R. 631, refd to. [para. 21].

Lethbridge v. Newfoundland (Minister of Health) (1992), 103 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 13; 326 A.P.R. 13; 47 C.C.E.L. 258 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 23].

Malone v. Ontario (1983), 3 C.C.E.L. 61; 45 O.R.(2d) 206 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 25].

Perehinec v. Northern Pipeline Agency, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 513; 50 N.R. 248; 51 A.R. 10, refd to. [para. 31].

Whitebear Band Council v. Carpenters Provincial Council of Saskatchewan and Labour Relations Board (Sask.), [1982] 3 W.W.R. 554; 15 Sask.R. 37 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Nicholson v. Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Board of Commissioners of Police and Ontario (Attorney General), [1979] 1 S.C.R. 311; 23 N.R. 410; 88 D.L.R.(3d) 671; 78 C.L.L.C. 14,181, refd to. [para. 55].

Knight v. Board of Education of Indian Head School Division No. 19, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 653; 106 N.R. 17; 83 Sask.R. 81; [1990] 3 W.W.R. 289; 69 D.L.R.(4th) 489, refd to. [para. 57].

Statutes Noticed:

Indian Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-5, sect. 81 [para. 28]; sect. 114, sect. 115, sect. 116, sect. 117, sect. 118, sect. 119, sect. 120, sect. 121, sect. 122 [para. 29].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Halsbury's Laws of England (4th Ed. 1976), vol. 8, paras. 1106 [para. 13]; 1303 [para. 52].

Harris, David, Wrongful Dismissal (3rd Ed. 1990), pp. 2-110 [para. 59]; 2-125 [para. 53].

Hogg, Peter W., Liability of the Crown (2nd Ed. 1989), c. 11, p. 249 [paras. 28, 30]; 250 [para. 30].

Counsel:

S. Green, Q.C., for the appellants;

L.M. Smordin, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 20, 1996, before Huband, Helper and Kroft, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal. On October 9, 1996, the decision of the court was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

Huband, J.A. (Helper, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 46;

Kroft, J.A., concurring - see paragraphs 47 to 60.