In an important decision, the Ontario Superior Court has reaffirmed the legal boundaries of employer liability in the context of internal workplace investigations. The case in question (M.P. v. Ontario Power Generation Inc.) serves as an important precedent for both employers and employees, particularly in disputes involving harassment allegations, severance negotiations, and constructive dismissal claims.
For those facing challenges related to workplace mistreatment or unjust terminations, understanding the implications of this ruling is essential. Whether you’re seeking a Toronto employment lawyer, a lawyer to negotiate a severance package, or a constructive dismissal lawyer, this case sheds light on the evolving landscape of employment law in Ontario.
Case Overview: A Conflict Rooted in Harassment and Resignation
The dispute began when a former manager at Ontario Power Generation (OPG) discovered that some coworkers had circulated an online news article linking his wife to a notorious criminal – convicted serial killer Bruce McArthur. The article, already public, was allegedly shared among staff in a way that violated the spirit of a judicial sealing order. The employee reported the situation to OPG, asserting that this behavior amounted to harassment and privacy invasion.
In response, OPG launched an internal investigation. However, the employee argued that the investigation lacked substance, failed to prevent further misconduct, and ultimately forced him to resign from his position. He later learned that the article had been disseminated to individuals at his new workplace, prompting him to file a legal claim against OPG, citing constructive dismissal, negligent investigation, intrusion upon seclusion, breach of fiduciary duty, and harassment.
Court’s Decision: No Employer Duty in Tort for Internal Investigations
OPG filed a motion to strike the employee’s claims, aiming to eliminate four specific causes of action from the legal proceeding. The Court agreed with OPG, setting important legal standards in the process.
1. Negligent Investigation: No Duty of Care from Employers
The employee alleged that OPG had conducted a careless and insufficient internal investigation, constituting negligent workplace investigation. However, the Court emphasized that employers do not owe a duty of care in tort when conducting internal reviews or workplace investigations. Unlike police or third-party investigators who may be liable for negligent investigations, internal company investigations fall outside this scope.
The employee further argued that because OPG’s Nuclear Safety Team conducted the workplace investigation, and those individuals were “peace officers” under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, a duty of care should apply. The Court rejected this argument, ruling that the employees were not acting in their official “peace officer” capacity during the investigation and were therefore exempt from such liability.
For employees pursuing legal redress after flawed internal processes, such as botched workplace investigations, this ruling makes it even more critical to consult a wrongful dismissal lawyer, severance package review lawyer or employment contract review lawyer early in the process.
2. Intrusion Upon Seclusion: No Intrusion Found
In his second claim, the employee alleged a breach of privacy through intrusion upon seclusion. This legal concept typically applies when an individual’s private life is intentionally intruded upon in a highly offensive manner.
However, the Court determined that the distribution of an existing public article does not constitute an “intrusion.” Citing leading precedent, the Court emphasized that the tort hinges on the act of intrusion, not the sharing of information already available in the public domain. Additionally, since the employees’ actions were outside the scope of their employment, OPG could not be held vicariously liable.
This element of the decision illustrates the difficulty of establishing privacy-related claims in the absence of clear and direct misconduct. If you are unsure whether your privacy has been unlawfully violated at work, a wrongful dismissal lawyer or Toronto employment lawyer can help assess your legal options.
3. Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Employment Relationships Do Not Presume It
Another claim made by the employee was that OPG had a fiduciary duty to act in his best interests during the investigation. The Court quickly dispelled this argument, noting that standard employer-employee relationships do not inherently involve fiduciary duties.
Under Canadian law, fiduciary duties arise in unique circumstances where one party agrees to act solely in the interests of another, to the exclusion of their own. The Court found no such relationship in this case. There was no indication that OPG had made such a commitment to the employee, especially while balancing its broader obligations as an organization.
For professionals negotiating new roles or contracts, understanding the limits of fiduciary obligations makes it essential to work with a lawyer to review employment contracts to ensure clarity on duties and responsibilities.
4. Harassment: Still Not a Recognized Tort in Ontario
Lastly, the Court struck the employee’s harassment claim, reaffirming that harassment is not yet a stand-alone tort under Ontario law. While some case law, such as Caplan v. Atas, has acknowledged a limited form of “internet harassment,” the employee’s allegations did not meet this standard. The Court found the conduct in question fell outside the scope of extreme or persistent online abuse that the recognized tort requires.
This part of the ruling underlines the ongoing legal ambiguity surrounding workplace harassment in Ontario. Employees experiencing persistent mistreatment should seek advice from a constructive dismissal lawyer or lawyer to negotiate severance packages to explore actionable claims under existing employment and human rights legislation.
Practical Takeaways for Employers: Mitigating Risk and Strengthening Culture
While the Court’s decision may provide reassurance for employers conducting internal investigations, it does not mean companies can act carelessly. Proper procedures remain essential for both legal compliance and workplace integrity.
Establish Clear Policies and Procedures
Create a comprehensive internal policy on how to handle complaints related to bullying, harassment, or discrimination. Clearly outline the steps for investigation and communicate these procedures to all employees. Regular updates and employee training are crucial to keeping everyone informed.
Train Human Resources and Management Teams
Managers and HR professionals should receive ongoing legal training and scenario-based workshops to understand how to approach sensitive investigations. Familiarity with privacy laws and conflict resolution methods can prevent liability and improve employee trust.
Maintain Confidentiality and Impartiality
Protecting the privacy of complainants and respondents is non-negotiable. Appoint neutral investigators – whether internal or through third-party firms – to ensure objectivity and reduce the appearance of bias.
Document Every Step of the Process
Thorough documentation is critical, from the initial complaint to the final report. Well-maintained records can serve as vital evidence if the situation escalates into litigation or a human rights complaint.
When in Doubt, Seek Legal Counsel
If your workplace investigation touches on sensitive issues like privacy, mental health, or termination, consult a Toronto employment lawyer or lawyer to review employment contracts early in the process. This ensures your actions are legally sound and defensible if challenged.
Final Thoughts: Understanding Your Rights and Responsibilities
This ruling marks an important moment for employment law in Ontario. While it limits certain tort-based claims against employers, it also emphasizes the importance of properly structured investigations and clear employment practices.
For employees, it reinforces the need for strategic legal support when dealing with workplace disputes. Whether you are negotiating a severance package, reviewing a job contract, or dealing with a dismissal, speaking with a specialized lawyer – such as a severance package review lawyer or wrongful dismissal lawyer – can significantly improve your outcome.
For employers, this case serves as a reminder: legal protections exist, but only when your internal policies are strong, fair, and compliant with employment law standards.
Need Help with a Workplace Investigation or Dismissal Claim?
Speak to a Toronto employment lawyer today to discuss your options. Whether you are an employee seeking justice or an employer aiming to mitigate legal risk, expert legal guidance is your most powerful tool.
Contact Us
It is important for an employee (or an employee) to obtain a legal consultation before taking any action that could affect the situation at workplace. Sezar has experience advocating for both employers and employees, which allows him to anticipate the other side’s arguments and develop an effective strategy, including termination of employment.
If you are looking for a wrongful dismissal lawyer in Toronto, call us today at 647-822-5492 for a case evaluation with an experienced employment lawyer.
Disclaimer: The content on this website and blog is not legal advice or legal opinion of any kind, and is only to provide general information. It is in no way particular to your individual case and should not be relied upon in any way. The outcome of a legal matter depends on its unique circumstances, and prior successes are not indicative of future results. No portion or use of this website or blog will establish a lawyer-client relationship with the author, this law firm or any related party. Should you require legal advice for your particular situation, please fill out the form below, or call 647-822-5492, to request an initial consultation.