Supreme Court

Decision Information

Decision Content

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA

Citation: Saturley v. CIBC World Markets Inc., 2013 NSSC 300

 

Date: 20130926

Docket: Hfx No. 305635

Registry: Halifax

 

Between:

 

Fredrick Thomas Saturley

 

Plaintiff

v.

 

CIBC World Markets Inc.

 

Defendant

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY HEADING

 

 

Judge:                            The Honourable Justice Michael J. Wood

 

Heard:                            April 4-5, 10, 12, 16-17, 19-20, 23-26, 30, 2012

May 1-4, 7-9, 14-16, 2012

October 1-4, 9-11, 15-18, 22-25, 29-31, 2012

November 1, 20-21, 2012

December 17-18, 2012, in Halifax, Nova Scotia

 

Final Written

Submissions:                   March 31, 2013

 

Written Decision: September 26, 2013

 

Subject:                          Employment         - Wrongful Dismissal     

- Just Cause 

- Condoning Conduct

- Post Termination Evidence of Cause


 

Evidence     - Witness Credibility

- Adverse Inference

 

Torts - Intentional Interference in Economic Relations

 

Summary:                      The plaintiff was employed as an investment advisor by the defendant.  Many of his clients were involved in trading options on margin.  As a result of an error in the defendants margin calculations, many clients suffered significant losses in their accounts.  While investigating the margin error, the defendant became aware of evidence suggesting that the plaintiff was engaged in unauthorized discretionary trading and terminated his employment for cause.

 

Issue:                    Was the defendant able to satisfy the onus of proving discretionary trading which would justify termination of the plaintiffs employment?

 

Was the defendants investigation of the plaintiffs trading activities unfair or biased?

 

Did the defendant engage in conduct which amounted to intentional interference in the plaintiffs economic relations with his clients?         

 

Result:                           The Court was required to consider witness credibility and the proper inferences to be drawn from documentary evidence in order to determine whether discretionary trading took place.  An adverse inference was drawn from the plaintiffs failure to call an employee witness who was alleged to be receiving client instructions and processing trades. 

 


The Court was satisfied that the defendant met the evidentiary burden of proving that discretionary trading occurred.  It rejected arguments by the plaintiff that the conduct was condoned or should result in discipline short of termination. 

 

The Court permitted the defendant to rely on post-termination evidence of discretionary trading in support of the allegation of just cause.  There is no evidence that the defendants investigation was improper or that it acted with any intent to harm the plaintiffs economic relationship  with his clients. 

 

The plaintiffs action was dismissed, with the exception of a small claim for outstanding disability benefits.

 

 

 

 

THIS INFORMATION SHEET DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE COURT'S DECISION.  QUOTES MUST BE FROM THE DECISION, NOT THIS LIBRARY SHEET.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.