Leclair v. Patel Pharma Inc., 2021 BCSC 1904

Mitha Law Group lawyers successfully acted for the defendant employer in a summary trial relating to a wrongful dismissal claim.

The plaintiff, Ms. Leclair, was employed as a Front Store Manager by the defendant, a Shoppers Drug Mart franchise, and its predecessor, from 2009 – 2019. She had previously been employed by a series of other SDM franchises. At the time of her termination, the plaintiff was entitled to a salary of approximately $82,000 per year. Following her termination, the plaintiff was offered a job as a manager of a Canadian Tire franchise with a starting salary of $52,000 per year. She declined that offer in favour of a lesser paying job with Air Canada in which she would receive travel perks. Due to COVID, the Air Canada job did not pan out.  

Ms. Leclair claimed she was entitled to 16-18 months’ reasonable notice, largely based on her assertion that her employment with all SDM franchises over an 18 year period should be counted towards her length of employment with the defendant. She also claimed a bonus and reimbursement for benefits during the notice period. Finally, she sought aggravated and punitive damages arguing that the defendant breached its obligation of good faith and fair dealing in the manner of her dismissal.

The defendant’s position was that the plaintiff’s length of employment was 9 years, 10 months as the company was not a “common employer” with the other SDM franchises. The plaintiff’s notice entitlement was, accordingly, at the low end of the 9-12 month range. Concerning the claim for a bonus and benefits reimbursement, the defendant argued that the plaintiff had not established she had a contractual right to a bonus, and she failed to establish that she had an entitlement to benefits reimbursement. The defendant also asserted that the plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages by declining the Canadian Tire job. Finally, the defendant argued that it had acted in good faith towards the plaintiff, and there was no basis for any additional damages.

The Court held in favour of the defendant on all key issues. The Court concluded:

1. The plaintiff’s length of employment for the purposes of calculating reasonable notice was 9 years, 10 months;

2. The plaintiff was entitled to only 10 months’ notice (minus severance already paid);

3. The plaintiff failed to mitigate her damages by declining the Canadian Tire job, and her damages were reduced accordingly;

4. There was no basis for any award of aggravated damages, punitive damages, or special costs against the defendant;

5. The defendant was entitled to its Costs from the date of its formal offer.