Appeals in wrongful dismissal matters

Appeals in wrongful dismissal matters are peculiar. Because the cases tend to be very fact specific only rarely will the appeal court intervene.

Today's decision in Beth v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 2008 ONCA 686 emphasises the point.

The Court holds:


[10]          In Minott v. O'Shanter Development Co. (1999), 42 O.R. (3d) 321 at para. 62, this court discussed the standard of review in wrongful dismissal cases:

62.       This submission must be judged against the standard of appellate review of wrongful dismissal awards. Determining the period of reasonable notice is an art not a science. In each case trial judges must weigh and balance a catalogue of relevant factors. No two cases are identical; and, ordinarily, there is no one "right" figure for reasonable notice. Instead, most cases yield a range of reasonableness. Therefore, a trial judge's determination of the period of reasonable notice is entitled to deference from an appellate court. An appeal court is not justified in interfering unless the figure arrived at by the trial judge is outside an acceptable range or unless, in arriving at the figure, the trial judge erred in principle or made an unreasonable finding of fact. If the trial judge erred in principle, an appellate court may substitute its own figure. But it should do so sparingly if the trial judge's award is within an acceptable range despite the error in principle.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4