
Publication
WHS Law Briefing
Welcome to our WHS Law Briefing. This briefing identifies key issues and emerging trends in WHS Law, and details significant legislative and case law developments from February to date in July 2025.
Author:
Canada | Publication | February 20, 2025
An Ontario court has delivered yet another unfortunate termination clause decision1. Employers may see articles and blogs once again announcing that a wide range of termination clauses are unenforceable and employees are free to claim expansive damages upon dismissal.
The reality is that the law of employment contract termination clauses is unsettled in Ontario at the moment, and this latest decision merely adds to the uncertainty.
This time around:
The reasoning here was that such language reserves the right to terminate when an employee is subject to legal protections, such as during a statutory leave of absence.
This ruling was made despite the fact the clause in question committed to payment of “any minimum compensation or entitlements prescribed by the Employment Standards Act.” The reasoning here was that “a regular employee cannot be expected to appreciate the difference” between scenarios in which employees are entitled to statutory amounts, and scenarios where they are not.
Both of these conclusions run counter to recent decisions from the same court – the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Until the Ontario Court of Appeal steps in to resolve this competing case law, employers and employees cannot know whether:
Until we receive clarity, employers should:
Publication
Welcome to our WHS Law Briefing. This briefing identifies key issues and emerging trends in WHS Law, and details significant legislative and case law developments from February to date in July 2025.
Publication
In Roberts Co (NSW) Pty Ltd v Sharvain Facades Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2025] NSWCA 161, the NSW Court of Appeal has found that, for the purposes of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (SoP Act), a deeming clause providing that a notice given after 5pm is to be treated as having been given and received at 9am on the next business day, does not extend the statutory time period for service of a payment schedule.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025