Fixed-Term Trap? Court Throws Out Employer’s Early Termination Provisions And Awards Former Employee The Balance Of The Contract – Employee Benefits & Compensation

In Dufault v. The Corporation of the Township of
Ignace, 2024 ONSC 1029, Justice Pierce found the early
termination provisions of a fixed-term contract were unenforceable
and awarded Ms. Dufault damages for the remaining term.

On November 24, 2022, Ms. Dufault executed a fixed-term contract
with the Corporation of the Township of Ignace (the
“Township”), under which her employment was set to end on
December 31, 2024. The Township terminated Ms. Dufault’s
employment without cause, effective January 26, 2023. Ms. Dufault
sued the Township, contending the contract’s termination
provisions were unenforceable and asking the Court to award her
damages for the balance of the contract.

Justice Pierce held that the contract’s termination
provisions were unenforceable for the following reasons:

1. The without cause termination provision provided for the
   payment of “base salary,” rather than “regular
   wages,” contrary to section 60 of the Employment Standards
   Act, 2000 (“ESA”);




2. The without cause termination provision did not reference the
   payment of vacation pay on termination;




3. The without cause termination provision did not explicitly
   mention certain components of the employee’s compensation,
   including her entitlement to 5 days of paid leave per year to
   compensate her for overtime hours;




4. It stated the Township could terminate Ms. Dufault’s
   employment without cause “at its sole discretion,” when
   the ESA prohibited it from doing so in certain circumstances;
   and




5. The termination for cause provision permitted the Township to
   withhold termination pay (and severance pay, if applicable) in
   circumstances where it was required to be paid under the ESA.

As a result, the Court awarded Ms. Dufault approximately
$157,071.57 in damages representing her expected earnings for the
remainder of the term of the contract.

This case is an outlier that has taken the application of the
Waksdale v. Swegon North America Inc. principles far
beyond the pole. However, it stands as an important reminder that
employment contracts must comply with the ESA and employers are
prohibited from contracting out of their obligations under the ESA.
Employers should have their employment contract templates reviewed
regularly to ensure compliance with the law.