Ebnc-Regulatory-Legaldecisions

FST decision in Montreal Trust

Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:31:00 GMT

The FST ordered the Ontario Superintendent to accept a court settlement order that declared a plan amendment implementing the surplus sharing agreement to be legally valid and binding and further ordered the Superintendent not to go behind the court order by doing an independent historical review of the pension plan documentation.

Court of Appeal casts doubt on employers' ability to alter pension, benefit and compensation arrangements

Mon, 03 Nov 2008 13:24:00 GMT

A Hewitt Advisory discusses a recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Wronko that may restrict the right of employers to fundamentally alter employment contracts, including pension, benefit and compensation arrangements -- even with adequate notice.

Federal court decision in the application for judiciary review in the Buschau matter

Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:24:00 GMT

Following the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Buschau, submissions were made to the federal Acting Superintendent of the Office of Financial Institutions concerning the Pension Plan for Employees of Rogers Communications Inc., and, in particular, the portion of that plan previously known as the Premier Plan. A Pension and Employee Benefits Bulletin from Blakes reports on the September 11, 2008 reasons for judgment of the Federal Court granting the application for judicial review of the Superintendent's decision and referring it back to the Superintendent for redetermination.

Markovic v. Autocom Manufacturing Ltd.

Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:33:00 GMT

This case is about the obligations of an employer to accommodate employee requests for time off for religious holidays. The complainant, Savo Markovic, is a member of the Serbian Orthodox Church which celebrates Christmas on January 7. The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal found it was not necessary to provide 2 days for religious accomodation. A menu of other options including using vacation time and time off without pay are acceptable.

Court upholds damage award for terminated bipolar employee

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 17:35:00 GMT

Employers struggling with how best to accommodate mental health in the workforce, will be interested in a new decision of the Ontario Divisional Court upholding an $80,000 judgment against an Ottawa company that dismissed a man with bipolar disorder.

The duty to accommodate: The Supreme Court rules in favour of the employer

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:16:00 GMT

The Supreme Court of Canada has just ruled in the case of Hydro-Québec, unanimously reversing the decision rendered by the Court of Appeal of Québec in February 2006. In doing so, the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of an employee as a result of excessive absenteeism due to an illness, after several unsuccessful attempts to accommodate her, reports a Stikeman Elliott Employment Law Update.

SCC permits dismissal of sick employee for excessive absenteeism

Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:15:00 GMT

The Supreme Court of Canada has unanimously reversed the decision of the Quebec Court of Appeal in Hydro-Québec, upholding the dismissal of an employee as a result of excessive absenteeism due to an illness, after several unsuccessful attempts to accommodate her.

Recent case law developments

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:41:00 GMT

A Pension Alert from the law firm of Borden, Ladner, Gervais highlights recent legal decisions of interest to the pensions community and their significance for employers.

Monsanto does not bind federally-regulated plans, FCA rules

Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:53:00 GMT

In a surprising decision, the Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Monsanto does not bind federally-regulated plans, and as a result surplus is not payable on partial wind up.

Former Imperial Oil employees lose their second kick at the can

Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:14:00 GMT

A new decision from the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench confirms the right of defined benefit pension plan sponsors to "adversely" amend qualification criteria for ancillary benefits, and reveals that the court has a low tolerance for repetitive litigation, even where the prior decision is from a regulator in another province