Another Termination Clause Bites the Dust

Following the case of Waksdale v Swegon North America Inc., 2020 ONCA 391, Ontario courts have placed increased scrutiny on termination clauses with very few surviving.

Recently, the Ontario court found a new reason to void a termination clause in Dufault v The Corporation of the Township of Ignace, 2024 ONSC 1029 (“Dufault”).

In Dufault, the Court voided the termination clause for three reasons (and of course, only one reason is enough):

  1. Expanding “With Cause” Definition:The provision referred to termination without notice “for cause”, which is a different and lower standard than “wilful misconduct, disobedience or wilful neglect of duty that is not trivial and has not been condoned by the employer”, which is the standard required to terminate employment without providing the notice (and potentially severance) required by the Ontario Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”);
  2. Narrowing “Regular Wages” Definition: The without cause provision referred to pay in lieu of notice using base salary only whereas “wages” under the ESA is defined more broadly and includes additional forms of compensation such as commissions and vacation pay; and
  3. Expanding Employer Discretion to Terminate:  The provision stated that the employer, in its “sole discretion”, could terminate employment at “any time”. The Court took issue with this language since the ESA prohibits an employer from terminating employment at the end of protected leave under the ESA or in reprisal for an employee’s attempt to exercise a right under the ESA.

Although the first two grounds for voiding the termination provision are not new, the third ground is novel and will likely void many existing termination provisions.

Why does this case matter? 

This is yet another case in which the courts set aside a termination clause and substitute in a common law amount of termination pay, which will almost always be higher.

Previously we wrote that the “one month per year of service” rule of thumb has become inaccurate for both short-service and long-service employees who can receive more than that now out-dated measure.

In light of Dufault, and the continuing trend of Ontario courts voiding termination clauses, we highly recommend getting in touch to have your employment agreements reviewed.

Share the Post:

Related Posts

Overhead view of a modern workspace with a laptop, resumes, job description documents, notebook, coffee mug, and subtle digital connections showing how AI is already integrated into everyday workplace tasks.

Why Every Employer Now Needs an AI Policy (Even If You Think You Don’t Use AI) 

Think your company doesn’t use AI? Think again. Employees are already using AI tools to draft emails, review resumes, and create content, often without formal approval. An AI policy helps employers manage privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, and compliance risks while encouraging responsible innovation. Learn why every employer needs clear AI guidelines before a problem arises.

Read More »
Two workplace professionals reviewing information on a laptop during a discussion about employee wellbeing and psychological safety in a modern office.

Psychological Safety and Employer Liability in Ontario: What You Need to Know 

Psychological safety is no longer just an HR concern. Ontario employers are increasingly expected to identify and address workplace factors that can contribute to psychological harm. From harassment and bullying to WSIB mental stress claims, failing to manage these risks can have legal consequences. Learn what psychological safety means in practice and why employers should take proactive steps now.

Read More »

Contact Us

Thank You For Your Interest. Kindly Complete The Form Below. Our Client Services team will be in touch with further information about our fees and intake process.
[grow-contact-form]