In this trial, Martin established that his client was entitled to severance despite having been called a “contractor” during his engagement with the Defendant. Four months’ pay was awarded to an employee who had worked for about one month.
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.
When I was wrongfully dismissed I contacted several law firms, but Tevlin Gleadle Curtis made me feel at ease on how to proceed and what to expect. They were very thorough throughout the process leaving no stone unturned. Even though this firm is small compared to their corporate counterparts, it has taken them on and won. The personal service I have received has been excellent. I would feel very confident in recommending Tevlin Gleadle Curtis to anyone that finds themself in need of employment lawyers.