In the case of Yang v. NITHA, dated June 21, 2023, the appellant, NITHA, appealed from the judgment of the Federal Court, which had set aside the award of an adjudicator under the Canada Labour Code. The adjudicator had found that the dismissal of the respondent, Yang, was justified, and NITHA was awarded costs of $4,500.00. The Federal Court had set aside the adjudicator's award with costs primarily due to a significant factual error made by the adjudicator. The error pertained to the date when Ms. Yang had indicated in writing that she appreciated her employment was in jeopardy. The adjudicator had mistakenly believed it was in December 2017, but the evidence confirmed that it was in an email Ms. Yang sent in May 2018 after receiving performance-related feedback from her manager. The Federal Court had retained jurisdiction over the remedy for Ms. Yang's unjust dismissal complaint, implicitly suggesting that her termination was unjust. However, in the appeal, it was argued that retaining jurisdiction was an error. The Court of Appeal had agreed with the Federal Court's findings regarding the adjudicator's error and had deemed it significant enough to render the award unreasonable. However, it had disagreed with the Federal Court's decision to retain jurisdiction over the unjust dismissal complaint.