In Quebec, the Labour Standards Act is the key provision guaranteeing that the workplace shall be free from psychologically harmful factors. However, as illustrated by a recent decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal, the usual rules of labour law can become the basis for sanctions against an employer who fails to ensure a healthy work environment.
Monthly Archives: June 2014
June 27, 2014
Employers’ duty to protect employees’ dignity and enforce their own policies and procedures
June 27, 2014
Employer communications with bargaining unit employees during negotiations — The current parameters in Quebec
While dialogue is quite often the key to solving disputes and ensuring harmony, there are circumstances where parties with opposite interests are not allowed to communicate. The Superior Court recently ruled that Quebec’s Labour Code could, in certain circumstances, prohibit an employer from communicating information to its employees during the negotiation of a collective agreement.
ILN Today Post
June 27, 2014
Starting out with clear intentions – the latest on letters of intent
A version of this article was published in Construction News on 13 June 2014
“As with so many things, the simplest solution is often the best”; so said the judge in the recent case of Twintec v Volkerfitzpatrick when trying to decipher the terms of a letter of intent. Whilst the nuances of letters of intent have been discussed at length for many years, the basic requirements for a letter of intent to create binding obligations are indeed straightforward – it must include: More…
June 26, 2014
ESOP Alert: U.S. Supreme Court subjects ESOP fiduciaries to heightened scrutiny
In a unanimous decision, in Fifth Third Bancorp, et al. v. Dudenhoeffer, et al., No. 12-751 (June 25, 2014) the United States Supreme Court eliminated the so-called Moench Presumption which protected fiduciaries of Employee Stock Ownership Plans (“ESOPs”). The MoenchPresumption was a legal concept created by federal courts over a nearly 20-year period for handling fiduciary duty lawsuits. Under it, the fiduciaries of a retirement plan like an ESOP governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) were presumed to have acted prudently with respect to their ERISA fiduciary duties when the ESOP invested in employer stock.
June 26, 2014
Business Litigation: Is your food and beverage label now susceptible to attack?
As a consequence of the United States Supreme Court’s recent unanimous ruling in Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., food labels will now come under increased scrutiny and attack by competitors. The issue under consideration was not actually the label but rather the interplay between two federal laws. Specifically, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates and enforces food and beverage labeling under the Food Drug & Cosmetic Act (FDCA) which allows companies to name drinks using the juices that provide flavor even if they do not provide the volume. In turn, the Lanham Act, which provides competitors the private right to sue, prohibits false and misleading statements about a product. Prior to the ruling, compliance with the FDA labeling regulations generally meant a product was immune from a claim that its labeling is deceptive or misleading with respect to those aspects of the label sanctioned by FDA regulations.
June 26, 2014
Business Litigation: Is your food and beverage label now susceptible to attack?
As a consequence of the United States Supreme Court’s recent unanimous ruling in Pom Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., food labels will now come under increased scrutiny and attack by competitors. The issue under consideration was not actually the label but rather the interplay between two federal laws. Specifically, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates and enforces food and beverage labeling under the Food Drug & Cosmetic Act (FDCA) which allows companies to name drinks using the juices that provide flavor even if they do not provide the volume. In turn, the Lanham Act, which provides competitors the private right to sue, prohibits false and misleading statements about a product. Prior to the ruling, compliance with the FDA labeling regulations generally meant a product was immune from a claim that its labeling is deceptive or misleading with respect to those aspects of the label sanctioned by FDA regulations.
June 26, 2014
Appeal Court Confirms Litigation Privilege In Regulatory Investigations
In a recent decision, the Alberta Court of Appeal concluded that litigation privilege may be properly claimed by a target of a regulatory investigation. In TransAlta Corporation v. The Market Surveillance Administrator (2014 ABCA196), the court allowed an appeal from a decision of a chambers judge of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench which held that the term “solicitor-client privilege” in section 50 of the Alberta Utilities Commission Act (“Act”) referred only to the privilege dealing with obtaining legal advice and did not extend to litigation privilege.
In its ruling, the court reaffirmed the importance and protection afforded to litigation privilege claims, recognizing that there is a need for both legal advice and protection of an associated zone of privacy when a party is facing an investigation that could result in a prosecution with serious consequences.
The facts of this case first arose in the 1990s, when Alberta decided to de-regulate its electricity and natural gas industries. Alberta established an independent body, the Market Surveillance Administrator (“MSA”) to oversee both industries.
June 26, 2014
All NLRB Decisions and Actions From August 27, 2011 Through July 17, 2013 Are Invalid or in Doubt
By: Adam C. Abrahms, Kara M. Maciel, Steven M. Swirsky, and Mark M. Trapp
The U.S. Supreme Court today held that the US Senate was not in recess on January 4, 2012, when President Obama made three “recess” appointments to the National Labor Relations Board under the Constitution’s Recess Appointment Clause. In simple terms that means that the recess appointments were not proper and s decisions in which the recess appointees participated were not valid.
June 26, 2014
“MommyShorts” is Blogging Her Way into Hearts, Homes, and Brands
Maybe you’ve seen them on Instagram or Facebook – pictures of babies dressed up in grown-up suits like so many chubby-cheeked David Byrnes. It’s called “baby suiting,” and it’s the latest photo craze instigated by mom blogger Ilana Wiles, who just a year ago launched a surge of “baby mugging,” which is just what it sounds like (well, maybe not) – taking pictures of babies as though they’re sitting in coffee mugs.
June 26, 2014
Case Review: McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
By Heather Hettiarachchi
In the much anticipated decision of McCormick v. Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP issued today, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Mr. McCormick, previously an equity partner of Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP (“Fasken”), could not avail himself of the protection afforded to employees pursuant to s. 13 of the British Columbia Human Rights Code (the “Code“), as his relationship with the firm was not that of an employee.
Connect with ILN
Firm of the Month
ILN Members Twitter Feed