Two Lawyers from KSW Recognized as Leaders in Employment & Family Law
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
CONTACT
PAY BILL
LINKEDIN
Home
> Lawyer Content
> Blog title on how to fine the perfect lawyer
Link To Youtube
Recent Media
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Contact Us

Secret Recording Proves "Untruthful, Misleading" Conduct

June 20, 2024

Secret Recording Proves "Untruthful, Misleading" Conduct

No items found.

Mr. Teljeur was employed as a General Manager for Pinestone Resort (“Pinestone”) in Haliburton, Ontario for a period of just over three years. On December 6, 2021, Pinestone terminated Mr. Teljeur’s employment on a without cause basis, advising that they elected to retain an outside management company to manage the resort moving forward. At the time of his termination, Mr. Teljeur, unbeknownst to Pinestone, recorded the termination meeting.

At trial in Teljeur v. Aurora Hotel Group, 2023 ONSC 1324, Mr. Teljeur was awarded 10 months’ notice, plus benefits, and reimbursement of expenses he had incurred on behalf of Pinestone. In addition to this, the Court awarded Mr. Teljeur $15,000 as moral damages, based on the secret recording of the termination meeting that Mr. Teljeur had produced. The recording unveiled conduct of Pinestone that was “untruthful, misleading or unduly insensitive”, causing a breach by Pinestone of their duty of faith and fair dealing in the manner of dismissal. This conduct included: failing to honour promises made to Mr. Teljeur in the termination meeting, encouraging Mr. Teljeur to resign in the termination meeting, and failing to reimburse Mr. Teljeur in a timely manner for the expenses he had incurred on Pinestone’s behalf. Regarding mitigation, Pinestone attempted to make a crafty argument that Mr. Teljeur had failed to mitigate his damages, claiming that he had “prejudiced” his job search efforts by posting negative comments about the company on his social media. The Court declined to comment on this argument and did not take this argument into consideration of its award for damages.

The Superior Court’s decision was ultimately affirmed on the (unsuccessful) appeal brought by Pinestone.

Tags
No items found.

Designated Paralegal

Courtney Burnett
Profile
No items found.
You may also be interested in...

Contact

Have questions? Need insight? Our team can assist you in examining your options and determining which path best suits your needs.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

*By clicking submit you agree you have read our Privacy Policy and Disclaimer
Disclaimer: the information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create a lawyer-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as a lawyer-client relationship has been established. By checking this box you agree to receive communications from KSW Lawyers, which may include quarterly email Newsletters containing legal updates (may easily unsubscribe at any time).