Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• The Court declined jurisdiction over defamation and conspiracy claims, finding they fall within the Education Labour Relations Act (ELRA) and the jurisdiction of the Teachers Labour Relations Board (TLRB).

• The plaintiff's removal as Professional Development Chair was held to arise from internal union disciplinary issues governed by s. 85(3)(b) of the ELRA.

• Legal characterizations of conspiracy and defamation were deemed inseparable from the workplace conflict and executive removal at YAEP.

• The Court ruled that the ELRA provides adequate remedies, including reinstatement, compensation, and broad remedial authority, making residual court jurisdiction unnecessary.

• All defendants, including YAEP officers and representatives, were found to fall under the scope of the ELRA.

• The Court emphasized that allowing civil claims in parallel would undermine the exclusive dispute resolution scheme established under Yukon’s labour legislation.

Background and parties involved

Michel Emery, a public school teacher employed by the Yukon government since 2004, was elected as the Professional Development Chair (PD Chair) of the Yukon Association of Education Professionals (YAEP) in October 2020, and re-elected on April 24, 2021, for a two-year term. While serving in this full-time executive role, he remained on leave from teaching but continued to receive his regular salary, benefits, and seniority from the Yukon government.

The YAEP is a statutory body under the Teaching Profession Act (TPA), representing public school teachers, principals, and education assistants in the Yukon. Its objectives include bargaining with the Yukon government and supporting professional development. The PD Chair role involves oversight of an annual $475,000 Professional Development Fund, jointly funded 50% by the Yukon government and 50% by YAEP. The position is part of YAEP's executive.

The named defendants include the YAEP, the Yukon government (Emery’s employer), Ethan Emery (Executive Director of YAEP), and Ted Hupé (President of YAEP). Ethan Emery is not related to the plaintiff.

Events leading to the claim

Shortly after taking office, Emery reported deteriorating workplace relations, alleging that he was intimidated, belittled, and harassed by Ethan Emery and later by Ted Hupé between 2021 and 2022. He filed a formal harassment complaint on May 14, 2021, resulting in an independent investigation that upheld two of his allegations against Ethan Emery. Ethan Emery also filed a complaint against the plaintiff.

In October 2021, YAEP sought a psychiatric evaluation of Emery, which did not proceed. On November 1, 2021, YAEP advised Emery of a motion to declare his PD Chair position vacant for alleged gross misconduct. Allegations included mismanagement of the Professional Development Fund, failure to attend meetings, misleading YAEP members, and issuing ultimatums. Emery responded, but the executive voted to remove him on November 22, 2021, and issued a public statement on November 23, 2021. His appeal to the Central Council was dismissed on February 19, 2022.

Administrative complaints and proceedings

In addition to internal YAEP processes, Emery made multiple complaints, including:

• Two complaints under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA); one led to changes in YAEP’s harassment policy and mandatory training.

• A successful Workers’ Safety and Compensation Board claim for a psychological work-related injury.

• A Human Rights Commission complaint, accepted against YAEP but stayed pending the civil claim.

• An Employment Standards Act claim for unpaid stipend and overtime, dismissed because the ESA does not apply to Yukon government employees.

• Ethics complaints within YAEP, outcomes unknown.

• Three Ombudsman complaints, one of which led to recommendations to improve YAEP’s appeal process.

Emery had no legal representation for any of these complaints.

Civil action and defendants’ motion

On January 6, 2023, Emery filed a civil claim for wrongful dismissal, conspiracy, and defamation. On January 8, 2025, he filed an Amended Amended Statement of Claim, removing the wrongful dismissal claim. He continued to seek damages (general, special, aggravated, punitive, and bad faith) and an injunction against defamatory statements.

The defamation claim alleged that the defendants made statements portraying him as incompetent, dishonest, a bully, and financially irresponsible, among other things. The conspiracy claim alleged that Ethan Emery and Ted Hupé conspired to remove him from his role and prevent him from raising complaints within YAEP.

The defendants applied to strike the civil claim, arguing that the TLRB had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter under the ELRA.

Court’s legal analysis and statutory interpretation

The Court applied the test for striking claims under Rule 20(26) of the Rules of Court and concluded that the essential nature of Emery’s claim concerned internal labour relations—namely, the fairness of his removal from an elected executive role within YAEP.

Chief Justice Duncan found that:

• Emery remained a bargaining unit member while serving as PD Chair.

• His duties did not exclude him from the ELRA under the managerial or casual employee exceptions.

• Both Ethan Emery and Ted Hupé were acting as representatives of YAEP and thus covered by the ELRA.

• Section 85(3)(b) of the ELRA, which prohibits discriminatory disciplinary action by unions, directly applies.

• The claim should be brought before the TLRB, which has broad remedial authority under s. 90 of the ELRA.

The Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that his civil claim should proceed because the ELRA does not offer common law damages. It held that the ELRA provides sufficient remedies and that denying civil court access does not result in a “real deprivation of ultimate remedy.”

Outcome and conclusion

The Supreme Court of Yukon held that the civil court lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims of defamation and conspiracy. The claims were dismissed on May 21, 2025, in Emery v Yukon Association of Education Professionals, 2025 YKSC 26. The Court deferred to the exclusive jurisdiction of the TLRB under the ELRA. Costs were reserved for case management.

At the time of the decision, Emery had already filed a complaint to the TLRB on December 13, 2024, seeking similar relief. The Board had accepted the complaint for review, and the matter remained ongoing.

In summary: the successful parties were the defendants, no monetary awards or damages were granted, and no costs were ordered at the time of judgment.