Summary Wallace Part 2 Cases

  • Post author:
  • Post category:Damages

Summary: Damage Awards: Wallace Part 2

This is a summary of awards of lost income caused by unfair conduct. A similar summary of post Honda and pre Honda awards for extended notice (pre Honda), aggravated and punitive damages (post Honda) is reviewed here (pre Honda) and here (post Honda).

 

CaseDetailsAggravatedPunitive
Date OrderOther Claims
Pre-Wallace Decision
Rahemtulla v VanFed Credit UnionThe employee, a bank teller, was accused of theft and summarily dismissed.  The accusation was false, and she had no opportunity to respond to the accusation, nor was a proper investigation made.  McLachlin J (as she then was) found the employer’s conduct was made in “threatening circumstances of the utmost gravity”.  She found the conduct “equally reprehensible as that of a person posing as a military policeman and accusing another of corresponding with a German spy.”  $5,000 for the intentional infliction of mental suffering; Awarded 6 months notice to bank teller of 15 months employment;
BCSC 1984Court determined longer period of unemployment would follow due to unfair allegations.

Pre Wallace decision
Deidal v Tod MountainEmployee terminated in the context of false allegations of dishonesty which would impact employment elsewhere due to other employers having misgivings about his or her character.$50,000 for the increased difficulty in finding new employment and $25,000 for mental distress, both recoverable as aggravated damages (Finch, J.A.)
B.C.S.C. 1995;The trial judge had allowed for a 15 month notice period of $60,000; damages for slander of $50,000; aggravated damages of $25,000; The award totaled $135,000.Braidwood, J.A. allowed for 27 months plus a further 6 months for total award of $135,000;
Upheld in B.C. Court of AppealAn alternative award was made of 33 months notice in the same amount.
Apr-97The two decisions of the majority were each concurring reasons. The total trial award was upheld. There was no pleading made of defamation. Braidwood J.A.’s reasons came to the same total of $135,000, which is hard to decipher in the reasons.

Post Wallace 1997
Zadorozniak v. Community FuturesPlff was publicly humiliated, before the Board, the staff, and the town of Merritt. Board members entered his office, lunged at him to unplug his computer, pinned him to the wall and called the police upon his pushing back. Increased notice period to 1 year, from 6 months.
BCSC“it is also reasonable to infer an effect on his ability to obtain other employment, given the importance of his job in such a small town and the public nature of the dismissal.  Indeed, Mr. Zadorozniak has left no stone unturned in seeking other employment and has been unsuccessful.”
Jan-05Plff was general manager of the defendant, 49 years of age, with 14 months service. Wallace factors allowed notice set at 1 year.

Downham v County of Lennox and Addington,Biased, shoddy investigation;$50,000 plus tort of intentional infliction of mental suffering of $20,000 and 5 months incremental notice;$100,000
OSC Dec 2005Employer intended to cause not only mental distress but social and economic damage. Para 239Defamation $1,000
By generating a substantially false investigation report which was circulated to senior staff and politicians in a small community and by the grossly exaggerated content of the letter of dismissal, the County created a stigma which prevented plff from finding alternate employment.  The County must be responsible for this longer period of unemployment and not just the period of notice justified by the Bardal factors.

Headley v City of TorontoUnfounded allegations of theft; refusal to reply to requests for a reference letter;$15,000
Aug-19Flawed investigation$50,000 for compensation in difficulty to find alternate employment
Finding made that the allegations made it more difficult for the plaintiff to find comparable employmentWallace part 2

📚
Back to Index

🔙 Back to Damages Main Page

🏠 Return to Canadian Employment Law