Henry v. Fox Ford

• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Court: Court of Appeal of New Brunswick
• Judge: Turnbull, Larlee and Robertson, JJ.A.
• Neutral Citation: 2004 NBCA 22
• Citation: 2004 NBCA 22,(2004), 269 N.B.R.(2d) 63 (CA),269 NBR (2d) 63,[2004] NBJ No 109 (QL),31 CCEL (3d) 72,(2004), 269 NBR(2d) 63 (CA),[2004] N.B.J. No 109 (QL),269 NBR(2d) 63,269 N.B.R.(2d) 63
• Date: 19 March 2003

Henry v. Fox Ford (2004), 269 N.B.R.(2d) 63 (CA);

    269 R.N.-B.(2e) 63; 707 A.P.R. 63

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2004] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. MR.050

Gerald Henry (appellant) v. Foxco Ltd., operating as Fox Ford (respondent)

(140/02/CA; 2004 NBCA 22)

Indexed As: Henry v. Fox Ford

New Brunswick Court of Appeal

Turnbull, Larlee and Robertson, JJ.A.

March 25, 2004.

Summary:

Henry sued his employer, Fox Ford, for damages for wrongful dismissal. Henry had a verbal altercation with his supervisor which ended with him being fired. Henry argued that even if the court accepted the supervisor's version of events, an isolated act would not provide just cause for dismissal.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, in a decision reported at [2002] N.B.R.(2d) (Supp.) No. 82, dis­missed Henry's claim. The confrontation was serious enough to justify the dismissal. The court held that in effect, Henry was refusing to be directed by his supervisor. He was "repudiating an essential condition of his employment". The court provisionally as­sessed damages based on an eight months notice period. Henry appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal, Turnbull, J.A., dissenting allowed the appeal. The court held that the trial judge erred in finding that Fox Ford was justified in termi­nating Henry's employment. The court accepted the notice period used by the trial judge in the provisional assessment.

Master and Servant - Topic 7550

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Cause or just cause defined - Henry sued his employer of over seven years, Fox Ford, for damages for wrongful dismissal - Henry had a single verbal altercation with his supervisor which ended with him being fired - Henry argued that even if the court accepted the supervisor's version of events, an isolated act would not provide just cause for dismissal - The trial judge dis­missed Henry's claim - The confrontation was serious enough to justify the dismissal - In effect, Henry was refusing to be di­rected by his supervisor - He was "repu­diating an essential condition of his em­ployment" - Henry appealed - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal allowed the appeal - The court discussed the general rule that a single incident of employment misconduct does not warrant summary dismissal - The court held that the single isolated incident of insolence in this case did not irreparably harm or destroy the employment relationship - Fox Ford failed to establish just cause for summarily dis­missing Henry.

Master and Servant - Topic 7554

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Wilful disobedience or insubordination - [See Master and Servant - Topic 7550 ].

Master and Servant - Topic 7559

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Inso­lence - [See Master and Servant - Topic 7550 ].

Master and Servant - Topic 7566

Dismissal of employees - Grounds - Repu­diation of contract of employment - [See Master and Servant - Topic 7550 ].

Practice - Topic 8800

Appeals - General principles - Duty of appellate court regarding findings of fact - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal, per Robertson, J.A. and Turnbull, J.A., dis­cussed the standard of appellate review from a finding of "just cause" in a wrong­ful dismissal case, including whether such a finding was one of fact or mixed fact and law - See paragraphs 17 to 36 and 56 to 84.

Practice - Topic 8800.1

Appeals - General principles - Duty of appellate court regarding findings of mixed law and fact by a trial judge - [See Prac­tice - Topic 8800 ].

Cases Noticed:

McKinley v. BC Tel et al., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 161; 271 N.R. 16; 153 B.C.A.C. 161; 251 W.A.C. 161, refd to. [paras. 8, 50, 64].

MacNaughton v. Sears Canada Inc. (1997), 186 N.B.R.(2d) 384; 476 A.P.R. 384 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 14, 47].

Dougherty v. Bathurst Golf Association Ltd. (1997), 189 N.B.R.(2d) 230; 482 A.P.R. 230 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 14, 47].

Justason v. Cox Radio & T.V. Ltd. (1997), 190 N.B.R.(2d) 228; 484 A.P.R. 228 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 14].

McCluskey v. Lawtons Drug Stores Ltd. (1998), 204 N.B.R.(2d) 137; 520 A.P.R. 137 (T.D.), affd. (1999), 210 N.B.R.(2d) 198; 536 A.P.R. 198 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Thompson v. Lex Tec Inc. (2001), 149 O.A.C. 106 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Islip v. Coldmatic Refrigeration of Canada Ltd. (2002), 167 B.C.A.C. 259; 274 W.A.C. 259 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Houlihan v. McEvoy et al., [2002] B.C.T.C. 16 (S.C.), affd. [2003] B.C.A.C. Uned. 56 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Bonneville v. Unisource Canada Inc. (2002), 222 Sask.R. 107 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Buhay (M.A.) (2003), 305 N.R. 158; 177 Man.R.(2d) 72; 304 W.A.C. 72; 2003 SCC 30, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Belnavis (A.) and Lawrence (C.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 341; 216 N.R. 161; 103 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Bernard (J.) (2003), 262 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 688 A.P.R. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [paras. 20, 66].

Gallant v. Thibodeau (1998), 206 N.B.R.(2d) 336; 526 A.P.R. 336 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 22, 66].

Carnaghan v. Bernard Insurance Ltd. (1982), 16 A.C.W.S.(2d) 32 (N.S.T.D.), refd to. [para. 43].

Donovan v. New Brunswick Publishing Co. (1996), 174 N.B.R.(2d) 23; 444 A.P.R. 23 (T.D.), varied (1996), 184 N.B.R.(2d) 40; 469 A.P.R. 40 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 43, 116].

Codner v. Joint Construction Ltd. (1989), 74 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 219; 231 A.P.R. 219 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [paras. 44, 118].

Beal v. Grant (1984), 52 N.B.R.(2d) 163; 137 A.P.R. 163 (C.A.), refd to. [paras. 48, 92].

Bramble et al. v. Medis Health and Phar­maceutical Services Inc. (1999), 214 N.B.R.(2d) 111; 547 A.P.R. 111 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 54].

Holloway v. Encor Energy Corp. (1991), 93 Sask.R. 226; 4 W.A.C. 226 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65].

Director of Investigation and Research, Competition Act v. Southam Inc. et al., [1997] 1 S.C.R. 748; 209 N.R. 20, refd to. [para. 66].

Arsenault v. Belanger (2002), 254 N.B.R.(2d) 353; 664 A.P.R. 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 66].

H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. (2002), 227 Sask.R. 165; 287 W.A.C. 165 (C.A.), leave to appeal granted (2003), 230 D.L.R.(4th) 735 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

Goodine v. Milk Marketing Board (N.B.) (2002), 251 N.B.R.(2d) 5; 654 A.P.R. 5 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 67].

Neudorf v. Sun Valley Co-Op Ltd. (1994), 94 Man.R.(2d) 204; 6 C.C.E.L.(2d) 61 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 80].

Boyes v. Saskatchewan Wheat Pool (1982), 18 Sask.R. 361 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 82].

Clouston & Co. v. Corry, [1906] A.C. 122 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 95].

Laws v. London Chronicle (Indicator Newspapers) Ltd., [1959] 2 All E.R. 285 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 99].

Giancola v. Jo-Del Investments Ltd. et al. (2003), 175 O.A.C. 197 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 104].

Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.) - see Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration.

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1, refd to. [para. 106].

Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701; 219 N.R. 161; 123 Man.R.(2d) 1; 159 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 107].

Belliveau v. Dylex Ltd. (1987), 79 N.B.R.(2d) 141; 201 A.P.R. 141 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 114].

Blainey v. Hickey (F.R.) (1985), 34 A.C.W.S.(2d) 82 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), refd to. [para. 117].

Nielsen v. Society of Notaries Public of British Columbia (1987), 14 B.C.L.R.(2d) 85 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 118].

Vatri v. Delco Wire & Cable Ltd. (1983), 19 A.C.W.S.(2d) 208 (Ont. Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 120].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Echlin, Randall, and Certosimo, Scott, The Law of Summary Dismissal in Canada (1998) (2003 Looseleaf Update), p. 17-1 [paras. 76, 99].

Levitt, Howard A., The Law of Dismissal in Canada (2nd Ed. 1992), p. 158 [paras. 25, 49].

Mole, Ellen E., The Wrongful Dismissal Handbook (1990), p. 39 [para. 45].

Mole, Ellen E., The Wrongful Dismissal Handbook (1997), pp. 75, 76 [para. 111].

Counsel:

George E. Kalinowski, for the appellant;

Peter E. Crocco, Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on March 19, 2003, by Turnbull, Larlee and Robertson, JJ.A., of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered in both official languages on March 25, 2004, when the following opinions were filed:

Turnbull, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 1 to 36;

Larlee, J.A. - see paragraphs 37 to 55;

Robertson, J.A. - see paragraphs 56 to 137.