Piron v. Dominion Masonry Ltd., 2012 BCSC 1070
This was Martin’s second constructive dismissal trial. In the result Martin got a big win for a deserving individual, including damages, costs and interest.
This was Martin’s second constructive dismissal trial. In the result Martin got a big win for a deserving individual, including damages, costs and interest.
Blair Curtis represented Patrick Moore in a case where the defendants unsuccessfully applied for an order to have the court decline jurisdiction. The court agreed with Mr. Curtis’ submissions, finding that Mr. Moore’s employment, and the legal action for wrongful dismissal damages following his termination, was properly governed by BC law. Blair’s client was also awarded costs of the application.
The court’s conclusion is at:
[73] I find that this Court has territorial competence over this matter, and NextEnergy has not established that Ontario is a more appropriate forum. As a result I decline to exercise my discretion to dismiss or stay this action. NextEnergy’s application is dismissed. Dr. Moore is entitled to his costs of this application.
Martin’s client had worked for two distinct periods, separated by an eleven month gap. Martin successfully established that his damages should be based on both periods, not just the second. The client received 12 months’ damages for wrongful dismissal as well as interest and costs.
In this case, Blair Curtis successfully represented employees who had departed from a former employer, along with the new company they started. In this judgment, the case against our clients was dismissed on the basis that the Court had no jurisdiction over the issues. The Court also ordered costs in favor of our clients against the former employer.
Martin’s first trial involved a constructive dismissal allegation. The defence was that the Plaintiff had quit. Martin won five months’ pay for a very deserving plaintiff, in addition to interest and costs.
In this trial, the plaintiff was successful in obtaining compensation from a departed business partner for his share of the liability arising from multiple property developments.
In this case, Blair Curtis successfully represented employees who had departed from a former employer along with the new company they started. In this judgment, the former employer was seeking an injunction to stop our clients from conducting their business. The Court ruled in favor of our clients, refusing the injunction and awarding costs against the former employer.
This was the retrial of this case following the successful 2008 appeal. Although convicted, the sanctions imposed were reduced from the original trial and, most importantly, took into account the consequences for the immigration status of the accused.
This was an appeal in a criminal case. The appellants successfully appealed multiple charges of possession and importing on the basis of improper Crown submissions to the jury.
This was David McWhinnie’s first appearance in the Court of Appeal. The appellant marine surveyors successfully appealed from a finding of professional negligence.
I chose Tevlin Gleadle Curtis to represent our group because of their reputation as one of the top Employment Law firms in British Columbia. They were the right firm to present our employment and pension class action cases. We definitely benefited by utilization of Tevlin Gleadle Curtis' "team" approach to resolving our list of issues in both classes. At all times our business was conducted in a very professional manner. I do not hesitate in recommending the Tevlin Gleadle Curtis team.