Ogletree Deakins Loses in Chu v. Parwell Investments Inc.
February 20, 2024 – In Chu v. Parwell Investments Inc., 2024 BCSC 312, the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled against Parwell Investments Inc., represented by Ogletree Deakins LLP, finding that the employer failed to prove just cause for terminating an employee. The court awarded 18 months’ notice, rejecting vague allegations of misconduct.
Read MoreNordia Inc.: Class Action Over Overtime Miscalculation
March 18, 2023 – A Quebec Superior Court authorized a class action against Nordia Inc., alleging the company paid overtime at 150% of a base rate ($16.50/hour) instead of the contract’s full rate ($21.75/hour), exploiting vague terms to shortchange hourly workers.
Read MoreCanada Cartage: Systemic Overtime Violations Certified
2015 – The Ontario Superior Court certified a class action against Canada Cartage, claiming its vague policies denied shunt drivers overtime pay under the ESA, exposing a pattern of exploitation via unclear contract terms.
Read MoreSifton Properties Ltd.: Invalid Termination Clause Hides Overtime
2012 – In Stevens v. Sifton Properties, the Ontario Superior Court voided a termination clause for vagueness, ruling it failed to address overtime benefits, costing a golf pro fair pay after dismissal.
Read MoreYoung & Rubicam: Ambiguous Clause Denies Overtime Benefits
2011 – Wright v. Young & Rubicam saw the Ontario Superior Court strike down a termination clause for not explicitly including overtime benefits, exploiting vague wording to limit a worker’s entitlements.
Read More