Mitigation Part 1: What is the Duty to Mitigate in Claims of Wrongful Dismissal?

Duty to Mitigate in Claims of Wrongful DismissalThe duty to mitigate is one of the few employee obligations in a wrongful dismissal dispute, and it can reduce a defendant employer’s liability significantly. 

What is the Duty to Mitigate?

The duty to mitigate requires an employee to take reasonable steps to secure comparable employment after they have been wrongfully dismissed. When an employer wrongfully dismisses an employee, unless there is enforceable contract language to the contrary, the employee is entitled to damages for pay in lieu of common law reasonable notice. 

Damages’ awards are designed to compensate a former employee for their losses as a result of the wrongful termination, including compensation for the income, benefits, and bonuses lost. The duty is based on the idea that the defendant employer should not be responsible for losses the former employee could have reasonably avoided. 

Therefore, the plaintiff employee has a duty to take reasonable steps to mitigate – or reduce – their losses, requiring them to make reasonable efforts to secure new, comparable employment. 

The Employee’s Duty

What does it mean for an employee to take “reasonable steps” to reduce their losses? What constitutes “comparable employment”? These are the two big questions adjudicators face when assessing whether an employee has met their duty to mitigate. Unfortunately, as with many legal concepts, there is no set test or formula that applies. 

Below are some of the factors Courts have historically considered in assessing the reasonableness of an employee’s efforts to mitigate: 

  • Whether the employee searched and applied for jobs in an appropriate industry matching their qualifications.
  • Whether the employee unreasonably delayed their search, though employees are not expected to start their job search the day after termination. 
  • Whether the geographic scope of the job search was reasonable. 
  • Whether the employer provided any assistance and whether the employee made use of the assistance provided (ex. Offering outplacement counselling, providing a reference letter, sending job postings).
  • Where an employee chooses to retrain and this delays their job search, whether the retraining is reasonable in the circumstances.
  • Whether the employee has a serious medical condition that may limit their job prospects.

“Comparable” employment is typically assessed based on: 

  • Compensation;
  • Job status or prestige; 
  • Job location; and 
  • Skills necessary for the job.

Ultimately, a Court will look at the totality of circumstances when deciding what is reasonable and comparable, and employees are typically given significant latitude in these assessments. Employees are not held to the standard of perfection. 

The Employer’s Onus 

While the employee bears the burden of taking reasonable steps to mitigate, the employer bears the onus of demonstrating to an adjudicator that the employee failed to mitigate. As is often the case in employment law, the employer’s onus is a heavy one.

In order to meet this burden, an employer defendant must demonstrate: 

  1. The former employee failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate their damages; and
  2. If the former employee had taken such reasonable steps, they would have been expected to secure a comparable position reasonably adapted to their abilities.

Reducing Entitlements to Damages

Damages in a wrongful dismissal action reflect the employee’s actual loss over the reasonable notice period. This means that, if an employee finds comparable employment, they will be awarded damages for reasonable notice less the amount they have mitigated but including any costs associated with mitigation. Where an employer successfully demonstrates the employee did not meet their duty to mitigate, wrongful dismissal damages may be reduced. 

Key Takeaways for Employers

When an employee sues for wrongful termination and is entitled to damages for common law reasonable notice, those damages are limited by the duty to mitigate. The onus of proving an employee failed to make reasonable efforts to mitigate their losses falls on the employer and it is a heavy onus. Nevertheless, it remains an important tool in an employer’s toolbelt when it comes to wrongful dismissal claims. 

In Part 2 of our Mitigation series, we will cover more recent guidance from the Courts on the duty to mitigate. 

If you have questions about termination entitlements or the duty to mitigate, get in touch!  

Share the Post:

Related Posts

Blue alarm clock representing timing and Ontario employment termination clauses after Baker

“At Any Time” Gets Its Time: Is There Any Certainty for Ontario Employers After Baker? 

Ontario employers finally have more guidance on employment termination clauses. In Baker v Van Dolder’s Home Team Inc.; Li v Wayfair Canada ULC, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld clauses using “at any time” and “for any reason.”

But Baker doesn’t give every employment contract a free pass. We unpack what the decision means for employers reviewing termination language today.

Read More »
Hands typing on a keyboard in front of illuminated computer screens, representing virtual workplace communication and online workplace misconduct.

Virtual Harassment: When Workplace Misconduct Happens Online 

Virtual harassment is becoming a growing workplace issue as employee interactions increasingly happen through digital platforms. From group chats and messaging apps to social media activity, online conduct can create real workplace consequences. Learn why employers should update workplace policies, extend conduct expectations beyond the office, and take a proactive approach to investigating and addressing virtual misconduct.

Read More »
December 31, 2026 AODA filing deadline for Ontario employers, displayed beside champagne glasses and gold New Year decorations

The Accessibility Deadline Many Ontario Businesses Don’t Know About: December 31, 2026

Ontario businesses and non-profits with 20 or more employees must file an AODA accessibility compliance report by December 31, 2026. Before certifying compliance, employers should confirm their headcount, complete required training, review accessibility policies and plans, address gaps, and file early. SpringLaw explains the deadline, key requirements, and practical steps Ontario employers should take now, before they file.

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]