Historically Significant Decisions

Here are a few examples of actual Grosman Gale Fletcher Hopkins LLP cases and how they were successfully handled.

Pilon v. Peugeot

Partners Brian and Norman Grosman successfully argued the first case of mental distress damages in employment law. Prior to Pilon, case law consistently denied damages for mental distress to employees whose employment had been terminated. This seminal decision created new law. Faced with a case in which their client had completely mitigated all of the damages a dismissed executive might recover under the then-existing case precedents, Brian and Norman Grosman moved to a creative legal argument. As a result, the court awarded damages for mental distress to Mr. Pilon. This case virtually changed the face of employment law in Canada. At Grosman Gale Fletcher Hopkins LLP, each case is approached with the same level of creativity that led to the award made to Mr. Pilon.

Delcan Corporation

Partner Bill Gale successfully defended Delcan Corporation when the Ontario Superior Court of Justice upheld the written contract of employment he drafted for Declan to manage its Canadian employees working abroad.

As the number of its international assignments increased, Delcan Corporation, a Canadian-based consulting engineering firm, worked with Grosman Gale Fletcher Hopkins LLP to develop written employment contracts to deal with the various issues unique to the international assignments of its personnel.

One of the Delcan engineers assigned to a project in Venezuela was dismissed pursuant to the terms of one of the international employment contracts we had drafted. He sued Delcan in Ontario, alleging that he was entitled to substantial damages pursuant to Venezuelan law. In the reported decision, Vasquez v. Delcan Corporation, the Court dismissed the claims of Mr. Vasquez and affirmed the enforceability of the terms of the contract which he had signed, significantly rejecting the applicability of Venezuelan law.

The firm’s experience and ability to draft the necessary employment contracts to protect in an international employment context, and then to advocate successfully in court to uphold that was reflected in the court’s decision and provided the client with the legal advocacy required to successfully enforce the contracts GG&G had drafted.

Antidormi v. Blue Pumpkin Software Inc.

Partner Natalie MacDonald won this leading case in the area of inducement.

In a reported 2004 decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Grosman Gale Fletcher Hopkins LLP client Melissa Antidormi was awarded a severance payment equivalent to one year’s total compensation in excess of $300,000.

Under normal circumstances, someone who has only been employed for five months at the point of dismissal would not expect such a large severance payment.

Notwithstanding Ms. Antidormi’s brief five months with her new employer, GG&G partner Natalie MacDonald was able to successfully argue that the enticements of Blue Pumpkin Software which caused Ms. Antidormi to leave secure employment elsewhere and the bad faith it manifested following its dismissal warranted this extraordinary remedy.

Covelli et al. v. Sears Canada Inc.

These motions raise the issue of whether a plaintiff employee can plead that a defendant employer had a policy or practice of terminating employees for cause when the defendant employer knew or ought to have known that no such cause existed.  Further, the motions raise the issue of whether a plaintiff can claim moral and punitive damages for alleged mistreatment of the plaintiff and others pursuant to this policy or practice.