Click here to bookmark Clausehound and search for clause/contract language

Choose from our expert-compiled document frameworks and customize from a vast library of clauses.

What legal rights do I have where an employer promised shares but did not deliver?

Trust is a big part of any deal, and  a situation where you’ve been hired and promised shares but never received any is a major breach of that trust. But does that trust translate into something legally binding, that when broken, gives you options for legal action?

 

The answer is in the details. When you say an employer has “promised” an employee shares, that can mean a few different things. If a verbal or oral agreement was made, it can be difficult to prove, even if it would otherwise be legally binding. If the shares were promised in a written agreement but never delivered, it can be much easier to force the employer to make good on the promise.


 

Verbal promises

Whether or not a verbal agreement is legally binding and enforceable depends on a number of important facts.

 

First and foremost is an employee’s ability to prove that a verbal agreement took place. This will require trustworthy testimony, and a clear reference to it in emails, messages, documents, journals, and so forth can be especially helpful. In cases like Druet v. Girouard (2012) (NBCA), email strings were accepted as verification of consent even when the electronic signatures themselves were disputed for not being totally accurate reflections of a person’s written signature. Supporting evidence lends weight, so don’t underestimate the importance of sifting through those emails!

 

Once the verbal exchange is proven to have taken place, the question becomes whether the elements of a binding agreement are present: an offer, acceptance, and consideration. That means there should be an identifiable exchange of something for the promise made, like money, or agreeing to accept a job in exchange for the promise of shares, to make the promise legally enforceable.

 

In the case of Fedel v. Tan (2010) (ONCA), Tan and Fedel started a new business together. They verbally agreed that Fedel would retain 60% ownership for organizing and administering the business, while Tan would retain 40% ownership for his financial involvement. Upon incorporation, Fedel received 100% of the shares issued, and Tan received none.Tan sued, and the judge looked at Tan and Fedel’s shared business history to determine that Tan had been entitled to 40% of the company. However, the judge decided against issuing shares to Tan. Because the business relationship between Tan and Fedel had been irreparably harmed by the dispute, ownership of shares in a closely held corporation would no longer have been a satisfactory result. The remedy instead was compensation.

 

So if you are entitled to shares, and can prove it, a court will still look at the particular circumstances to decide what the appropriate remedy will be, and this may not be the promised shares.

 

Written promises

If your employment agreement contains a provision entitling you to a particular number of shares at a particular point in time and you do not receive those shares, you may be able to bring an application in court to compel the employer to transfer the shares to you according to the terms of the employment contract.

Of course, this will not enhance the quality of your relationship with your employer! You are better off trying to use friendly channels to obtain the shares.

 

Stock Restriction Agreements

Before doing so however, you will need to look into the details of the contract. Often, employees or contractors will sign a stock restriction agreement. This contract usually provides that you are entitled to a certain number of shares that will vest over a period of time, for example X number of shares on July 20 each year, or X number of shares on the last day of each month. Until the shares have vested they are ‘restricted.’ Restricted shares can usually be redeemed (bought back) by the company at a very low price if your contract with the company is terminated, or if other trigger events take place (e.g., you are convicted of certain types of crimes). Often you are not entitled to vote restricted shares, and you may not be entitled to any dividends that have been declared. If you are terminated, you will not have a right to the promised shares if they have not yet vested.

 

 

Employee Stock Option Plans

Another common way for employees to believe they have been promised shares is under an Employee Stock Option Plan (ESOP). Your contract may entitle you to a certain number of options per year, or you may only be eligible to receive options if the directors use their discretion to grant options to you in any given year. It is important to check the fine print of the plan to determine what you are entitled to.

 

Once you have been granted options you will be able to exercise them to purchase shares at a set price. You will likely only exercise this option if the share value is at or above the purchase price. Note that the options will have an expiry date and many plans will specify that the company has the right, but not the obligation, to buy back any shares purchased under an ESOP if the employee’s contract is terminated for any reason.

 

To see standard versions of the agreements discussed in this article, visit our Small Business Law Library!

This blog was co-written by Alina Butt.

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

As a Programmer, Are You Committing Intellectual Property Theft by Abstracting Ideas Learned at Work Into a SaaS Product?

In this day and age, technology is taking over every aspect of our lives. Ideas developed for one area can be modified with ease and adopted in another area. If you are starting your own business, you need to protect your intellectual property to avoid someone else using your hard work in a different market. But what if you come up with an idea while working on a different project?

 

 

What is intellectual property theft?

Intellectual property theft is the stealing of creative ideas. In the area of start-up businesses, intellectual property is a huge concern. After all, you are dealing with new ideas in its early stages with significant progress to be made. As a programmer, you come across new ideas all the time, which may inspire some ideas of your own. The challenge is making sure that you aren’t taking anything that is not yours. The line between committing intellectual property theft and the creation of new ideas is not always clear, but the agreements you have signed as a developer may give you some clues about where to draw the line.

Source

 

Master Service Agreement

Start with the Master Service Agreement. If you are performing work for someone, your specific tasks, duties, and obligations should be clearly outlined. A well drafted Master Service Agreement will define your intellectual property rights as of before the work begins with the developer, while the work is in progress, and after the work is completed. These definitions are extremely important and often hotly negotiated, as is the ownership of these types of intellectual property. You may wish to make sure that the definition of client confidential information is not so broad that it includes all ideas developed during the term of the agreement.

 

Click here to see Clausehound’s Master Service Agreement!

 

 

Employment Agreement

If you are an employee, the rights you have as a developer may be a bit more limited.

Most employment contracts will contain language which requires you to transfer all rights to intellectual property created during the course of your employment. Some agreements allow employees to develop ideas independently, if they are developed outside of work time and without the use of employer intellectual property or confidential information.

 

Click here to see Clausehound’s Employment Agreement!

 

Under the Copyrights Act, if the work is created in the course of employment under a contract of service, then the employer will be the owner of the copyright in the work created by the employee. What this means is that you cannot retain any rights to work created during the course of your employment if you do not have an agreement that allows you to retain that right. Copyright includes artistic work but may be much broader and can include work related to technology.

 

Under the Patent Act, courts have decided that the employee will retain ownership pursuant to two exceptions. First, if you are “hired to invent”, which means hired for the purpose of creating ideas for your employer, then you would not be able to claim those ideas as your own. Your employer retains those rights and any ideas that you have. The second exception allows the employer to obtain the rights if you transfer those rights to the employer in an agreement.

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

Are All Arbitration Provisions in an Employment Agreement Enforceable?

Whether a particular arbitration clause will be enforceable depends on the way in which the clause is drafted. Generally speaking, if (i) the clause is clear, (ii) arbitration is made mandatory, and (iii) the contract can otherwise be enforced, the arbitration clause will be enforceable.

 

Source

 

Arbitration Provisions

It’s best to start with a brief rundown of what arbitration provisions should include. A basic arbitration clause will be an agreement between the parties to use arbitration instead of the courts in the event of a dispute. The clause should be broad enough to cover all types of disputes and questions of interpretation of the contract. If the clause is not broadly worded, one of the parties could argue that the particular dispute was not within the scope of the arbitration clause.

 

The clause should either specify the following details, or incorporate a set of arbitration rules that provide for such details as:

  • how many arbitrators will be chosen to decide the matter;
  • how an arbitrator is to be chosen (both parties must agree upon someone, and if they are unable to reach a decision within a specified time frame, a mechanism must be in place for the choice of an arbitrator);
  • the rules of the arbitration process (there are many standard sets that can be referenced—for example, see the ADR Institute of Canada’s Arbitration Rules);
  • the seat or location where the arbitration will take place;
  • the language to be used during the arbitration process; and
  • the applicable governing law and jurisdiction.

 

Check out Clausehound.com for sample arbitration clause language!

 

Unenforceable Arbitration Clauses

There are two main reasons why courts have held arbitration clause to be unenforceable – bad drafting and matters of public policy.

Source: Jérome Dessômmes – ÉCRIVAINS CONSULT/Wikipedia

 

Bad drafting

If the arbitration clause creates too many ambiguities, or if arbitration is not clearly mandatory, the  bad drafting of provisions may cause the clause to be unenforceable.

There are a few main areas of concern that have been identified by the courts:

  • The arbitration process and procedure should either be written with great detail to avoid the possibility of either party claiming their obligations were unclear, or reference should be made to a recognised set of arbitration rules which themselves contain this detail.
  • To convey obligation and enforceability, mandatory language should be used in the provisions instead of optional language (for example, using “shall” or “must” instead of “may”).
  • Time periods need to be specified (in the contract or in a set of arbitration rules) for when notice of arbitration should be given, how much time is to be given at each step of the arbitration process, and by when the process should be completed and a decision given.

 

 

Public policy

Sometimes an arbitration clause can run afoul of public policy. This has been especially true in the United States, notably in situations where there is a great inequality of bargaining power between the parties to the contract.

 

One concern expressed by American commentators relates to the cost-effectiveness of arbitration. An examination of case law by Wigdor LLP in New York discussed how arbitration provisions can be invalidated if the costs involved are excessive in a way that “could preclude a litigant from effectively vindicating [his or her] federal statutory rights in the arbitral forum.”

 

Another point of growing concern relates to how arbitration can create, as National magazine puts it, “an alternate system of justice” that more often than not rules in the company’s favor and leaves litigants feeling like they have not rightfully received their day in court.

 

To see standard employment agreements and arbitration provisions, visit our Small Business Law Library!

 

This article was co-authored by Alina Butt.

 

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

How Can I Prevent Employees from Posting Material on Behalf of my Company?

Links from this article:
Source
NDA
Small Business Law Library

During World War II there was an expression designed to keep people from sharing seemingly unimportant information with others, especially in public places: “Loose lips sink ships.” Today that public space is the internet, and the “loose lips” of employees can quickly tarnish a company’s reputation or divulge confidential information. The key is to make it very clear that the company has specific expectations about how employees will (or will not) communicate online about the company.

 

Source

 

The informal approach 

The simplest way to make your expectations clear for your employees is to meet with them face-to-face and let them know their obligations and responsibilities. It makes the imperative personal and serious. There’s nothing more crystal-clear than looking them in the eye and telling them whether they can or cannot talk about certain things outside of work, and if they can, what the parameters are for sharing information approved to be released.

 

 

This is most effective if timed correctly. It makes the most sense to inform employees about such expectations shortly after hiring them. If you wait too long, they won’t realize that their conduct and the habits they have formed are in breach of your expectations. One systematized way of debriefing employees is to send out an informal information letter. You can use this to:

  • Remind employees of their responsibilities to the company relating to confidentiality and what information they can and cannot share, and in what ways
  • Remind employees they can’t share such information with anyone, including friends and family, and especially not the Internet—at least not without prior approval
  • Specify how long this obligation is to survive, be it forever or just until the end of their employment

 

Implement company guidelines

It’s a good idea to more formally write down and disseminate a company-wide policy that describes the company’s policy and guidelines on what constitutes acceptable or unacceptable sharing of information and representation of the company outside of work.

 

Making an electronic copy of the guidebook available on every employee’s computer and drawing it to their attention ensures that an employee can’t say you never told them or they had no way of knowing!

 

Source

 

Set it in (contractual) stone

If you really want to make sure your employees are under a legal obligation to do nothing that could tarnish the reputation of the company, include language in the employment contract requiring employees to adhere to the company policies as revised from time to time.

Include confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses in the contract, or have them sign an NDA. Make sure these clauses include express provisions that forbid discussion of the company or company business on social media or with the press, without express authorization by the company.

 

To see a standard employment agreement, visit our Small Business Law Library!

 

Conclusion

The threat of dismissal for breach of their employment contract is likely the best incentive when it comes to encouraging employees to uphold their employer’s image on the internet. Setting clear expectations early on can save everyone much grief—and keep loose lips from sinking the company ship.

 

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

Are volunteers unpaid interns or employees?

Are Volunteers Unpaid Interns or Employees?

(Or…How to “Hire” a Volunteer).

The job market in a number of professions such as marketing, legal and non-profit has become increasingly competitive in recent years. It is not unusual for young professionals entering the job market to enhance their résumés by volunteering or completing internships.

Volunteering as an intern is a win-win scenario.  For the individual interning it is an excellent way to gain experience. Many companies value the “try before you buy” approach to hiring.  For the purpose of recruiting a volunteer or intern a company may wish to enter into a formal intern agreement, and to that end we have included a sample volunteer/intern agreement linked to this article.

 

Recruiting volunteers has led to some problems for employees and employees, often in the situation in which such volunteer positions carry with them the types of responsibilities and demands which would normally be expected from an employee. Based on the increase in unpaid positions in various industries, the Ontario Ministry of Labour (the “MOL”) has begun to ask the question: Are unpaid internships or volunteer positions legal?

The answer has proven to be surprisingly complex. Although an employer may call an individual an intern, by itself that is not enough to prevent a court from finding that the intern must actually be considered to be an employee who is protected under the Employment Standards Act (“ESA”).

The MOL has taken action to determine whether interns are being treated properly by employers. In a 2014 Blitz report, out of 56 well-known employers inspected for their internship practices, 13 employers had internship programs with ESA contraventions. These employers were handed compliance orders.

How these rules affect non-profit and charity organizations that engage volunteers is yet to be confirmed by the MOL. However, so long as a volunteer’s responsibilities do not mirror the responsibilities of an employee, a volunteer will not likely be found to be an employee.

To assist you in drafting an intern agreement we have supplied a sample intern agreement here.

In the event an unpaid internship issue is brought forward in a tribunal or court, the judge would consider a number of factors on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the individual was actually functioning as an employee.

This topic is still being hotly debated between proponents and opponents of unpaid internships, so keep an eye out for possible amendments to employment legislation.

The Ontario government has provided strict conditions for having an unpaid intern. Such conditions include:

  • The training received by the intern is similar to training received in a vocational school;
  • The training benefits the intern more than it benefits the organization;
  • The internship is not a prerequisite for an employee position; and
  • The intern is informed and consents to an unpaid internship.

Note that some experts have gone as far as saying that the organization should incur no benefit from the intern.

 

Since the rules on whether an intern is an employee are not crystal clear, it is a good idea for the hiring organization to consult counsel before entering into an intern agreement.

 

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

 

Read more...

What legal documents do I need for on-boarding employees and directors to my start-up?

As your startup grows, you will find yourself needing to hire more and more people. If you’re bringing employees onto your team it’s important to have a solid employment agreement ready to go, with clearly outlined expectations in relation to work responsibilities and long-term goals. It is equally important to know how to welcome and train new board members. This will make the process of on-boarding go far more smoothly, saving you a substantial amount of time and money.

Director On-Boarding

Expanding your board of directors requires preparation and careful thought. Directors are often brought in on the basis of being complementary to the company—he or she has a skill set or resources that are useful to and advantageous for the startup. This can be attractive to both parties, but the company should also inform the incoming directors of the duties and legal responsibilities associated with being a board director.

Some general points to cover include:

  • Directors are legally liable for and have a fiduciary duty to the company
  • Directors have a duty of care to the company, and as such are required to supervise and manage its affairs such that, if done wrong or omitted, can leave them liable
  • Directors do have options when it comes to protecting against liability, like obtaining insurance
  • Payment terms, if there are any, including how directors are to be compensated (e.g., cash, options, or a mixture of both)

Perhaps a subtler point, but one that should still be made known to an incoming director, is that in smaller startups, shareholders are often far more involved in the business through the use of a unanimous shareholders’ agreement. This can replace the board of directors to some extent, restricting their powers but at the same time reducing some of their responsibility for liability.

In any event, while welcoming incoming board members, the company should also impress upon them that directing the company is a responsibility that should be treated with great thought and care.

pexels-photo

Employee On-Boarding

On-boarding is popularly discussed in terms of building a friendly and supportive work environment for a new employee to make the transition easier so they can reach peak productivity faster.

That’s definitely something that should be done. However, another side of on-boarding involves making sure employees have the appropriate employment documents to make the terms of their employment very clear.

These documents can include:

  • A comprehensive offer letter that provides details related to payment terms and benefits
  • A non-disclosure agreement, otherwise known as a confidentiality agreement
  • A rundown of federal and provincial employment policies that outline the company’s rights and liabilities in relation to the employee’s
  • An Employment Handbook or Manual, which serves a dual purpose—to inform the employee of further offer terms such as time off, but also to explain work culture and work towards workplace integration

 

To see a standard employment agreement, visit our Small Business Law Library!

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

Elsegood v Cambridge Spring Service Ltd., 2011 ONCA

Discussion: The employee was found by the court to be terminated after 35 weeks of the layoff period had concluded. The employee successfully sued for six months notice of termination as a result of this “constructive dismissal”, with the date of termination deemed to be the first day of the lay-off period. Under s. 56(1) of the Employment Standards Act (ESA), an employer terminates an employee if the employer lays the employee off for 35 weeks in a period of 52 consecutive weeks. Termination under the ESA results in a termination under common law – the ESA and the common law co-exist. Furthermore, a term of an employment agreement that is inconsistent with the ESA is null and void for all purposes (Machtinger).

Therefore, even if the employment agreement contained an implied term allowing the employer to place the employee on indefinite layoff, it would be null and void since it fails to meet the ESA’s minimum standard.

The employee is therefore permitted to claim constructive dismissal at common law whenever a layoff exceeds 35 weeks in 52. Background:

  • Under s. 56(1) of the Employment Standards Act (ESA), an employer terminates an employee if the employer lays the employee off for 35 weeks in a period of 52 consecutive weeks.
  • The plaintiff employee had worked for the employer for seven years and was laid off twice in 2009, the total of which surpassed the allowable limit under the ESA.
  • The plaintiff bought an action for common law damages for wrongful dismissal. The action was allowed. The defendant employer appealed arguing that the ESA and common law are separate legal regimes and a dismissed employee should not benefit from both. The employer also argues that the termination was “deemed” by the ESA and not brought about by the employer, which should preclude any common law entitlement. Lastly, the employer asserts that the unemployment agreement contained an implied term that allowed the employee to be placed on an indefinite layoff.

Issue:

  • Whether the operation of s. 56(1) of the Employment Standards Act can support an employee’s claim for common law damages.

Rule:

  • The ESA does not specifically deem a termination, but rather it deems the date of the termination.
  • Termination under the ESA results in a termination under common law – the ESA and the common law co-exist.
  • A term of an employment agreement that is inconsistent with the ESA is null and void for all purposes (Machtinger).

Analysis:

  • Even if the employment agreement contained an implied term allowing the employer to place the employee on indefinite layoff, it would be null and void since it fails to meet the ESA’s minimum standard. The employee is therefore permitted to claim constructive dismissal at common law whenever a layoff exceeds 35 weeks in 52.

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...

Wood v. Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc., 2011 ONSC

Discussion: This case deals primarily with the distinction between an employee and an independent contractor. Although the parties in this case intended to structure their relationship so that the applicant would be regarded as an independent contractor, the parties conduct indicated otherwise. The main difference between an employee and an independent contractor lies with the element of CONTROL that the employer has over the worker. Factors to consider when assessing whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor include:

  • The level of control the employer has over the worker’s activities
  • Whether the worker provides his or her own equipment
  • Whether the worker hires his or her own helpers
  • The degree of financial risk taken by the worker
  • The degree of responsibility for investment and management held by the worker
  • The worker’s opportunity for profit in the performance of his or her tasks

Facts:

  • Applicant worked for the defendant as a pipe fitter.

    He was seriously injured while removing a decommissioned gas standpipe.

  • The applicant started an action for damages, alleging that he was working as an independent contractor for the employer at the time of the injury.
  • The respondents commenced a right to sue application under s. 31 of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (the Act), which authorizes the tribunal to determine whether, because of this Act the right to commence an action is taken. S. 27 and 28 of the Act prohibit a worker injured in the course of employment from suing his or her employer if he was injured while acting in the capacity of an employee or worker at the relevant time and is not an independent contractor
  • The tribunal allowed the application of the respondents and held that the applicant was not entitled to sue. The applicant seeks judicial review of this decision.

Issue:

  • Was the tribunal accurate in its conclusion that the applicant was an employee of the defendant and therefore not allowed to sue.

Rule:

  • The Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal is entitled to judicial deference on the reasonableness standard.

  • Contractual arrangements can be used to supplement viva voce evidence, provided that the written word corresponds with the manner in which the parties actually conduct themselves. In these cases, the law is concerned with what people actually do and not what they agreed to do. More importantly, the law will not blindly accept the classification label the parties have placed on their relationship (Joey’s Delivery Service v. New Brunswick (Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission)

Analysis:

  • Although the parties intended to structure their relationship so that the applicant would be regarded as an independent contractor, the parties’ conduct indicates otherwise. The Tribunal noted that the respondent continued to pay a salary to the applicant when he was off work and after he returned to work on modified duties; the applicant’s earnings were reported to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board; the respondent exercised a high degree of control over the applicant’s work; the applicant did not hire his own helpers; the applicant had marginal financial risk; the applicant had no meaningful opportunity for profit. The Tribunal’s decision fell within the range of possible and acceptable outcomes that were defensible with regard to the facts and the law. It was not unreasonable.

Conclusion:

  • Application dismissed.

 

–  –  –

This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not create a lawyer-client relationship with the reader. It is not legal advice and should not be regarded as such. Any reliance on the information is solely at the reader’s own risk. Clausehound.com is a legal tool geared towards entrepreneurs, early-stage businesses and small businesses alike to help draft legal documents to make businesses more productive. Clausehound offers a $10 per month DIY Legal Library which hosts tens of thousands of legal clauses, contracts, articles, lawyer commentaries and instructional videos. Find Clausehound.com where you see this logo.

What you don't know can hurt you! Subscribe to stay informed.

Sign up now and receive an email when we publish new content.

We will never give away, trade or sell your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Read more...
Additional Rent Announcements API Approval of Terms Asset Purchase Agreement Background Intellectual Property Board of Directors Business Case Law CASL Clausehound Collaboration Commercial Lease Confidential Information Confidentiality Consulting Agreement Contract Drafting Contract Negotiations Corporation Costs and Expenses CPD Definition of Intellectual Property Dispute Resolution Distribution Agreement Employee Employment Employment Agreement ESOP Events Farming Law Generally Used Clauses Grant of Licence Handling of Confidential Information Indemnity Independent Contractor Independent Legal Advice Informal Discussions Intellectual Property Investor Journey Licence Restrictions Limitation of Liability Long Form Marriage Contract Master Services Agreement NDA Non-competition Not for Profit Articles of Incorporation Notice of Arbitration No Waiver Obligations Ownership of Intellectual Property Ownership of Work Product Parties Partnership Prenuptial Agreements Privacy Policy Product Sales Agreement Purpose Representations and Warranties Restrictive Covenants Safeguarding Requirements Settlement Agreement Shareholder Agreement Software Development Start-up Subscription Agreement Technology Termination Term Sheet Terms of Use Trademark Registration Transfer of Intellectual Property Waivers and Releases Website Terms of Use
Show All Tags