Tanton v. Crane Canada Inc., (2000) 278 A.R. 137 (QB)

• Judge: Watson, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: October 03, 2000
• Citations: (2000), 278 A.R. 137 (QB);2000 ABQB 837

Tanton v. Crane Can. (2000), 278 A.R. 137 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] A.R. TBEd. DE.042

Lindsay Tanton (plaintiff) v. Crane Canada Inc. (defendant)

(Action No. 9803-12887)

Indexed As: Tanton v. Crane Canada Inc.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Watson, J.

November 20, 2000.

Summary:

The plaintiff sued his employer for dam­ages for wrongful dismissal, claiming that he was constructively dismissed when the employer changed his job assignment.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the plaintiff's action and determined the plaintiff's damages.

Damages - Topic 911

Aggravation - In contract - Aggravated damages - Wrongful dismissal - The plaintiff was employed for 25 years as a warehouseman, working inside the ware­house - The employer changed the plain­tiff's job assignment by moving him out­side to the pipe yard - The plaintiff, who had physical and intellectual limitations, believed that the pipe yard work was more strenuous than he could handle and he was unfamiliar with the equipment in the pipe yard - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the plaintiff was construc­tively dismissed - The plaintiff's work had been a central part of his identity - The court held that the appropriate notice period was 22 months, given the plaintiff's limited skills, increased years and health - His ability to find employment was doubt­ful - The court added two months' notice because of the employer's insensitivity and callousness toward the plaintiff which accompanied his dismissal - See para­graphs 154 to 174.

Master and Servant - Topic 7502

Dismissal of employees - General prin­ciples - What constitutes dismissal or discharge - Constructive dismissal - The plaintiff was employed for 25 years as a warehouseman - The plaintiff worked inside the warehouse picking and packing pipe for customers' orders - The employer changed the plaintiff's job assignment by moving him outside to the pipe yard - The plaintiff, who had physical and intellectual limitations, believed that the pipe yard work was more strenuous than he could handle and he was unfamiliar with the pipe yard equipment - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the plaintiff was constructively dismissed - Over the years the employer accepted and encouraged the plaintiff's narrow scope of performance and the consistent years of activity amounted to the creation of a position for the plaintiff that suited his capacities and served the employer's business aims - The employer intended to eliminate the plain­tiff's narrow position to increase efficiency - The employer knew that outside work was significantly different from inside work and the plaintiff would have diffi­culty with the new position because of his limitations - See paragraphs 116 to 147.

Master and Servant - Topic 8000

Dismissal without cause - Notice of dis­missal - What constitutes reasonable notice - [See Damages - Topic 911 ].

Master and Servant - Topic 8003

Dismissal without cause - Notice of dis­missal - Reasonable notice - Consider­ations affecting (incl. bad faith) - [See Damages - Topic 911 ].

Cases Noticed:

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, reving. in part [1995] 9 W.W.R. 153; 102 Man.R.(2d) 161; 93 W.A.C. 161; 34 C.B.R.(3d) 153; 14 C.C.E.L.(2d) 41; 95 C.L.L.C. 210-046, supplementary rea­sons 107 Man.R.(2d) 227; 109 W.A.C. 227 (C.A.), reving. [1993] 7 W.W.R. 725; 87 Man.R.(2d) 161; 49 C.C.E.L. 71 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 1, footnote 1].

Wells v. Toka Ltd. (1991), 94 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 257; 298 A.P.R. 257 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 117, footnote 2].

Pathak v. Jannock Steel Fabricating Co. et al. (1999), 228 A.R. 312; 188 W.A.C. 312 (C.A.), reving. (1996), 186 A.R. 277 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 119, footnote 3].

Farber v. Compagnie Trust Royal, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 846; 210 N.R. 161; 97 C.L.L.C. 141,030, reving. (1995), J.E. 95-1307; D.T.E. 95T-737; 55 A.C.W.S.(3d) 90 (Que. C.A.), consd. [para. 119, footnote 4].

Wilkinson v. Eaton (T.) Co. (1992), 130 A.R. 55; 2 Alta. L.R.(3d) 71 (Q.B.), consd. [para. 121, footnote 5].

Orth v. MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates Ltd. (1986), 8 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1; 16 C.C.E.L. 41 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 122].

Longman v. Federal Business Development Bank (1982), 131 D.L.R.(3d) 533; 36 B.C.L.R. 115 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 124, footnote 7].

Trollope & Calls Ltd. v. North West Met­ropolitan Regional Hospital Board, [1973] 1 W.L.R. 601 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 124, footnote 9].

Reber v. Lloyds Bank International Canada (1985), 61 B.C.L.R. 361; 7 C.C.E.L. 98; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 122 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 125, footnote 10].

Cayen v. Woodwards Stores Ltd. (1993), 22 B.C.A.C. 32; 38 W.A.C. 32 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 125, footnote 11].

MacFarlane v. Westfair Foods Ltd. (1994), 158 A.R. 267 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 126, footnote 12].

Stein v. British Columbia Housing Man­agement Commission (1992), 41 C.C.E.L. 213; 65 B.C.L.R.(2d) 181 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 126, footnote 13].

Lay v. Jaffary (1995), 168 A.R. 360 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 130, footnote 14].

Saunders v. Fredericton Golf & Curling Club Inc. (1993), 140 N.B.R.(2d) 387; 358 A.P.R. 387 (T.D.), revd. (1994), 151 N.B.R.(2d) 184; 387 A.P.R. 184 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 131, footnote 15].

Winsor v. Canada Trust Co. (1993), 110 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 341; 346 A.P.R. 341 (Nfld. C.A.), refd to. [para. 132, footnote 16].

Bowen Estate v. Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers Ltd. (1999), 126 O.A.C. 139 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 135, footnote 17].

Elliott v. Southam Inc. (1988), 88 A.R. 329; 59 Alta. L.R.(2d) 376 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 148, footnote 18].

Tymrick v. Viking Helicopters Ltd. (1985), 6 C.C.E.L. 225 (Ont. S.C.), refd to. [para. 150, footnote 19].

Corker v. University of British Columbia (1990), 33 C.C.E.L. 246 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 151, footnote 20].

Mifsud v. MacMillan Bathurst Inc. (1989), 35 O.A.C. 356; 70 O.R.(2d) 701 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 151, footnote 21].

Bramble et al. v. Medis Health & Pharma­ceutical Services Inc. (1999), 214 N.B.R.(2d) 111; 547 A.P.R. 111; 46 C.C.E.L.(2d) 45 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 154, footnote 22].

Bardal v. Globe & Mail Ltd., [1960] O.W.N. 253; 24 D.L.R.(2d) 140 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 154, footnote 23].

Lefebvre v. HOJ Industries Ltd.; Machtin­ger v. HOJ Industries Ltd., [1992] 1 S.C.R. 986; 136 N.R. 40; 53 O.A.C. 200, reving. (1988), 31 O.A.C. 1; 66 O.R.(2d) 545; 55 D.L.R.(4th) 401; 23 C.C.E.L. 77 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 154, footnote 24].

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; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 161, affing. [1985] 2 W.W.R. 289; 57 A.R. 268; 16 D.L.R.(4th) 359; 35 Alta. L.R.(2d) 124 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 155, footnote 25].

Watkins v. Olafson et al., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 750; 100 N.R. 161; 61 Man.R.(2d) 81; 61 D.L.R.(4th) 577; [1989] 6 W.W.R. 481; 39 B.C.L.R.(2d) 294, reving. in part [1987] 5 W.W.R. 193; 48 Man.R.(2d) 81; 40 C.C.L.T. 229 (C.A.), reving. (1986), 40 Man.R.(2d) 286 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 157, footnote 26].

Cronk v. Canadian General Insurance Co. (1994), 19 O.R.(3d) 515 (Gen. Div.), revd. (1995), 85 O.A.C. 54; 25 O.R.(3d) 505 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 158, footnote 27].

Durand v. Aluminum & Glass Mart Ltd. et al. (1997), 26 O.T.C. 387; 26 C.C.E.L.(2d) 272 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 30].

Farmer v. Foxridge Homes Ltd. et al. (1992), 134 A.R. 55; 45 C.C.E.L. 144 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 31].

Mallet v. New Brunswick (1982), 43 N.B.R.(2d) 309; 113 A.P.R. 309; 142 D.L.R.(3d) 161 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 32].

Ciciretto v. Embassy Cleaners Inc. (1998), 75 O.T.C. 91 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 33].

Tedford v. Woodward Stores Ltd. (1990), 31 C.C.E.L. 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 34].

Kuny v. Owens-Corning Canada Inc. (1999), 246 A.R. 168 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 35].

Clark v. Fibreglas Canada Inc. (1993), 138 A.R. 280 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 36].

Hildebrand v. Culinar Inc. (1996), 108 Man.R.(2d) 70; 17 C.C.E.L.(2d) 137 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 37].

Mazur v. International Paper Canada Inc. (1998), 234 A.R. 120 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 38].

Ellsworth v. Murray Canada Inc. (1997), 51 O.T.C. 39; 33 C.C.E.L.(2d) 253 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 39].

Muraca v. Woodward Stores Ltd., [1988] B.C.J. No. 2988 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 164, footnote 40].

Driscoll v. Coseka Resources Ltd. (1992), 130 A.R. 378 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 165, footnote 41].

Cowper v. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (2000), 132 O.A.C. 178; 1 C.C.E.L.(3d) 380 (C.A.), affing. (1999), 96 O.T.C. 368 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 165, footnote 42].

Vorvis v. Insurance Corp. of British Col­umbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1085; 94 N.R. 321, affing. (1984), 9 D.L.R.(4th) 40; 53 B.C.L.R. 63 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 168, footnote 43].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Harris, David, Wrongful Dismissal (1998), vol. 1, pp. 4-159, 4-160, 4-161, s. 4.36(i) [para. 159, footnote 28].

Counsel:

Michael D. Roberts (Snyder & Co.), for the plaintiff;

Timothy P. Chick (McCarthy Tetrault), for the defendant.

This action was heard on October 3, 2000, by Watson, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmon­ton, who delivered the following decision on November 20, 2000.