Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 NOVEMBER 2011

The Future Of Compensatory, Aggravated And Punitive Damages Post-Honda

Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in United Grain Growers v. Wallace, Canadian courts have struggled with damages for bad faith in the manner of dismissal, finding difficulty distinguishing bad faith conduct from that which warrants punitive damages.

CanadaEmployment and HR

Article by Earl A. Cherniak , Jasmine T. Akbarali and Roslynn Kogan1

Originally published for the 9th Annual Employment Law Summit

Introduction

Since the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in United Grain Growers v. Wallace,2 Canadian courts have struggled with damages for bad faith in the manner of dismissal, finding difficulty distinguishing bad faith conduct from that which warrants punitive damages. The courts have also faced jurisdictional hurdles when allegations of discrimination and harassment become intertwined with other employment-related claims.

Keays v. Honda3 has clarified some of these issues, dramatically altering the nature of damages for bad faith in the manner of dismissal in the process. In this article, we consider the Supreme Court of Canada's decision and identify the post-Honda implications for compensatory, aggravated and punitive damages in the employment context.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from