Stewart et al. v. Ryan, (2002) 247 N.B.R.(2d) 51 (TD)

• Judge: Léger, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: January 31, 2002
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (2002), 247 N.B.R.(2d) 51 (TD)

Stewart v. Ryan (2002), 247 N.B.R.(2d) 51 (TD);

    247 R.N.-B.(2e) 51; 641 A.P.R. 51

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: [2002] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. FE.048

Ron Stewart & Grant Trider (plaintiffs) v. Michael A.A. Ryan (defendant)

(F/C/495/99)

Indexed As: Stewart et al. v. Ryan

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Fredericton

Léger, J.

January 31, 2002.

Summary:

The plaintiffs were laid off from their em­ployment. They retained the defendant law­yer, who informed them that they had a strong civil case for wrongful dismissal. The defendant misled the plaintiffs to believe that he was conducting a civil action on their behalf, although no action had been com­menced. In fact, there was no basis for a wrongful dismissal action because there was a grievance process under the plaintiffs' collective agreement. The plaintiffs sued the defendant.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, allowed the action. The defendant was negligent, in breach of contract and in breach of his fiduciary obli­gations. However, the plaintiffs suffered no loss because they would not have been successful had they grieved under the collec­tive agreement. The court awarded each plaintiff $1,500 nominal damages.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583

Negligence - Particular negligent acts - Wrong procedure - The plaintiffs were laid off from their employment - They retained the defendant lawyer, who informed them that they had a strong civil case for wrong­ful dismissal - The defendant misled the plaintiffs to believe that he was conducting a civil action on their behalf, although no action had been commenced - In fact, there was no basis for a wrongful dismissal action because there was a grievance pro­cess under the plaintiffs' collective agree­ment - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that the defendant was negligent, in breach of contract and in breach of his fiduciary obligations - However, the plaintiffs suf­fered no loss because they would not have been successful had they grieved - The court refused to award punitive or ag­gravated damages because those types of damages augmented compensatory dam­ages and there was no legal basis for com­pensatory damages in this case - The court awarded each plaintiff $1,500 nominal damages.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2584

Negligence - Particular negligent acts - Re commencement and continuation of action - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2663

Negligence - Damages - Measure of - Nominal damages - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2665

Negligence - Damages - Re failure to commence action - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2674

Negligence - Damages - Exemplary or punitive - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Damages - Topic 905

Aggravation - General - Aggravated dam­ages - Claim for - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Damages - Topic 1297

Exemplary or punitive damages - Con­ditions precedent (or when awarded) - [See Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 2583 ].

Labour Law - Topic 6594

Industrial relations - Collective agreement - Interpretation - Layoffs - Seniority clauses - The plaintiffs' employment was ter­minated due to downsizing - The collective agreement provided that any layoff or discharge was to be made on a seniority basis "provided that the remaining employ­ees are able to perform the work required in a satisfactory manner" - The plaintiffs had the least seniority in the press depart­ment - However, two employees in the composing department had the least senior­ity in the company - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that the plaintiffs had no reasonable chance of success on a grievance - The plaintiffs could not have accomplished any of the required work in the composing department and no reasonable training for a reasonable period of time would have permitted them to perform that work - See paragraphs 37 to 52.

Cases Noticed:

Fisher v. Knibbe (1992), 125 A.R. 219; 14 W.A.C. 219 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

M.S.M. Design ltée et al. v. Bertrand (1998), 207 N.B.R.(2d) 286; 529 A.P.R. 286 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Page v. Barrister (1971), 3 N.B.R.(2d) 773 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Melanson v. Cochrane, Sargeant, Nichol­son & Paterson (1985), 63 N.B.R.(2d) 91; 164 A.P.R. 91 (T.D.), affd. (1986), 68 N.B.R.(2d) 370; 175 A.P.R. 370 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Recha and Klein v. Yeamans and Gere (1993), 135 N.B.R.(2d) 360; 344 A.P.R. 360 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

St. Anne Nackawic Pulp & Paper Co. v. Canadian Paper Workers Union, Local 219, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 704; 68 N.R. 112; 73 N.B.R.(2d) 236; 184 A.P.R. 236, refd to. [para. 40].

Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929; 183 N.R. 241; 82 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 40].

Vorvis v. Insurance Corp. of British Columbia, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 1085; 94 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 56].

Counsel:

Gale L. McDonald, for the plaintiffs;

Patrick E. Hurley, Q.C., for the defendant.

This action was heard on April 17, 18 and 19, 2001, by Léger, J., of the New Bruns­wick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Divi­sion, Judicial District of Fredericton, who delivered the following decision on January 31, 2002.