|
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
liability for negligence in a labour dispute
Bruce Grist examines the decision in Fullowka et al v. Royal Oak Ventures Inc. et al, where the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories dealt with an action in negligence brought as a result of the deaths of nine miners at the Giant Mine in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. The Workers' Compensation legislation (the Workers' Compensation Act) precluded an action by employees or their dependants against their employer or fellow employees. However, the legislation did not preclude actions against other employers or other parties. As a result, the miners who had been employed by Royal Oak sued persons other than their employer, while miners who had been employed by a contractor to Royal Oak, Procon Miners Inc., sued persons other than Procon. Legislation in other jurisdictions is more encompassing with respect to protection of parties from being sued due to issues arising out of employment. However, the case is illustrative of an action in negligence related to employment.
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
the compensability of stress
Workers' compensation legislation is designed to provide no-fault, compensatory benefits to employees who are injured as a result of an accident arising out of or in the course of employment. However, a number of jurisdictions in Canada have limited compensation for stress to acute stress as a result of a sudden and unexpected traumatic event. Further, in jurisdictions where compensation for chronic stress is permitted, strict tests must be met in order to qualify for benefits. Eric Durnford and Amy Bradbury review the requirements and the application of the tests in various jurisdictions as well as the legitimacy of placing such restrictions on workers' compensation benefits in light of the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Martin and Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation Board) v. Laseur.
EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION
state immunity in wrongful dismissal cases
Jennifer Fantini analyzes the complex area of "state immunity," where the commercial nature of the employment relationship may, in certain circumstances, exempt wrongful dismissal litigation from the immunity granted to foreign states. The author notes that jurisprudence in this area seems to be tacitly encouraging foreign state employers to allege just cause, in order to avoid the jurisdiction of the Canadian courts. 708 |
|
Matthew L.O. Certosimo
Editor-in-Chief
Borden Ladner
Gervais LLP
Toronto
Robert Bonhomme
Heenan Blaikie LLP
Montreal
Joe Conforti
Goodmans LLP
Toronto
Eric Durnford, QC
McInnes Cooper
Halifax
Bruce R. Grist
Fasken Martineau
DuMoulin LLP
Vancouver
Brian J. Kenny, QC
MacPherson, Leslie
& Tyerman LLP
Regina
Janice B. Payne
Nelligan O’Brien
Payne LLP
Ottawa
Laurie Robson
Borden Ladner
Gervais LLP
Calgary
|