This post is an excerpt from Shafik’s article published by Vancouver Bar Association’s The Advocate.
Since the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., trial and appellate courts in Canada have followed, distinguished, explained, mentioned and cited the decision in over 650 cases.
The breadth of employer conduct that attracts bad faith dismissal damages can be substantial.
It is arguable that in some wrongful dismissal cases, the courts are opting for a more expedient solution of awarding Wallace damages than going through the exercise of determining whether there is actually a basis for mental distress, aggravated or punitive damages. It would seem that because the concept of bad faith dismissal is more flexible and expansive in scope than the remedies of mental distress, aggravated and punitive damages and because of the much lower threshold for claiming Wallace damages, the courts are more inclined to award the Wallace damages and summarily dismiss claims for mental distress, aggravated and punitive damages. Moreover, once the courts award Wallace damages they appear to be content in not awarding other damages such as mental distress, aggravated or punitive damages. Since in most cases the same evidence is proffered by employees to advance claims for mental distress, aggravated and punitive damages and the theory of the courts is that awarding under any one of the latter heads of damages amounts to double recovery. Read the rest of this entry »