Federal Court



Crucial question whether applicant “dismissed” or employment contract expired

Applicant had worked as special adviser to AFN under series of one-year term contracts commencing in 2003. Applicant was advised that his employment with AFN would end on September 25, 2009, but was subsequently extended to March 31, 2010. Applicant filed complaint of unjust dismissal against AFN pursuant to s. 240 of Canada Labour Code. Adjudicator determined that he had no jurisdiction over complaint because applicant was not permanent employee at time of termination of his employment and dismissed applicant’s complaint of unjust dismissal. Application for judicial review allowed. Adjudicator erred in finding that he had no jurisdiction to inquire into justness of employer’s decision to sever employment relationship. Crucial question for adjudicator was whether applicant was “dismissed” or whether term of his employment contract had expired and was not renewed. Answer to this question required adjudicator to make finding in clear and unmistakable terms as to when applicant’s contract of employment was to expire. This he failed to do. Matter was remitted to same adjudicator for re-determination.

Young v. Assembly of First Nations (May 16, 2012, F.C., Mactavish J., File No. T-1443-11) Application for judicial review from 25 D.E.L.D. 147 was allowed. 218 A.C.W.S. (3d) 852 (11 pp.).

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?