Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff alleged wrongful denial of long-term disability (LTD) benefits and employer misconduct

• Claims against employer and supervisor were deemed grievable under the FPSLRA, barring court jurisdiction

• Section 236 of the FPSLRA precludes civil claims where grievances are available

• The lawsuit against Sun Life for LTD benefits was allowed to proceed

• Court reduced cost award to reflect fairness and avoid unduly penalizing the Plaintiff

• Plaintiff ordered to pay partial indemnity costs of $8,468 to the Attorney General of Canada

Facts and outcome of the case

Background and parties involved

The Plaintiff, Mr. Howell, initiated a legal action involving multiple parties: his employer Transport Canada (TC), his direct supervisor Francois Collins, and the insurance company Sun Life. Mr. Howell alleged that TC and Collins had misrepresented key facts and caused him emotional distress. Central to the litigation was also his claim against Sun Life for denial of long-term disability (LTD) benefits, which he asserted he was entitled to receive under the policy.

Jurisdictional issue with claims against Transport Canada and Collins

The court examined whether the Plaintiff’s claims against TC and Collins could be heard in a civil court or if they were governed by another legal regime. It concluded that under section 236 of the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act (FPSLRA), any employment-related disputes, including allegations of misrepresentation and emotional distress, are matters that fall within the grievance process prescribed by that statute.

Because of this, the court held that it had no jurisdiction over those particular claims. Consequently, the actions against TC and Collins were stayed, meaning they were effectively put on hold or dismissed due to being out of the court’s scope.

Proceeding against Sun Life

Despite the dismissal of claims against the employer and supervisor, the lawsuit continued against Sun Life. The court found that the claim regarding the denial of LTD benefits was distinct and not governed by the FPSLRA. Therefore, Mr. Howell was permitted to proceed with his case against the insurer.

Costs decision following the motion

Following the successful motion by the Attorney General of Canada (AGC) to strike the claims against TC and Collins, the court turned to the issue of legal costs. The AGC requested substantial indemnity costs amounting to $18,139.15, arguing that the claims lacked merit and were legally barred from the outset.

The court acknowledged the complexity of the case and the significance of the jurisdictional issues but found that imposing full indemnity costs would be disproportionate and unfair. As a result, it reduced the award to $8,468, granting costs on a partial indemnity basis to avoid punishing the Plaintiff excessively.

Final outcome

Ultimately, the court stayed the claims against TC and Collins, confirming that those matters must be dealt with under the FPSLRA grievance process. However, Mr. Howell’s claim against Sun Life for LTD benefits remains active and will continue through litigation. Additionally, he was ordered to pay $8,468 in costs to the AGC as a result of the motion to strike.