Just Cause Terminations: What I’ve Learned from Representing Employees

As an employment lawyer, one of the most common issues I deal with is helping employees facing a “just cause” termination. At first glance, it might seem straightforward: an employer claims serious misconduct, and the employment ends. In reality, the law sets a very high bar. Termination for just cause is often called the “capital punishment” of employment. Put simply, it is reserved for only the most serious misconduct.

In my experience, many employers overstate their case, and it is not unusual for these claims to fail in court. What I see time and again is inconsistency in how the employer treats the employee during the very investigation that is supposed to justify dismissal. That inconsistency alone can undermine a just cause claim. What’s a typical reason? An employer attempting to avoid providing the employee with a severance package.

Understanding Just Cause Termination in Ontario

In Ontario, termination for just cause is not taken lightly. The law requires misconduct so serious that it fundamentally undermines the employment relationship, such as theft, dishonesty, or deliberate breaches of company policy. Courts consider the employee’s length of service, role, prior disciplinary record, and the employer’s conduct during any investigation. Simply alleging poor performance or issuing a few warnings is typically insufficient. In some cases, such as under the Ontario Employment Standards Act, 2000, 2000, employers must demonstrate wilful or intentional misconduct to justify termination.

Employer Conduct During an Investigation Matters More Than You Think

I’ve had cases where an employee was accused of misconduct, but the employer allowed them to continue in a senior role, or attend important management meetings.

If an employer truly believes that an employee has irreparably damaged the trust that underpins their employment, you would expect immediate action:

• Suspension or restriction from sensitive duties

• Removing access to confidential company systems

• Limiting involvement in decision-making

When an employer does not take these steps, it sends a strong signal that they did not genuinely believe the employee as a risk or the misconduct as severe, which judges notice. In other words, the employer’s own conduct can contradict their claim of just cause.

Procedural Fairness is Important

It is not just what allegedly happened; it is how the employer investigates. Courts want to see that the investigation is:

• Timely and proportionate

• Based on objective evidence rather than hindsight or biased accounts

• Conducted by a person that is experienced in workplace investigations and is neutral and unbiased

• Conducted in a way that gives the employee a fair chance to respond 

• Takes into account the employee’s responses

I have handled cases where internal investigations relied almost entirely on post-employment complaints or interpretations of conversations weeks later. In those situations, courts often find the employer’s process flawed, which weakens any claim of just cause.

Inconsistencies Can Make or Break a Case

One of the clearest lessons from my practice is that employer inconsistency can be decisive. If an employee is trusted to continue in their role, travel internationally, or make significant decisions during an investigation, it strongly suggests that the employer did not believe the employment relationship was truly irreparably broken. That contradiction is something judges look at closely when deciding Ontario wrongful dismissal claims.

Practical Advice for Employees

If you are facing a termination for alleged misconduct, here are a few things I always recommend:

1. Document everything. Keep records of emails, approvals, or directives showing your actions and the employer’s behaviour (which can help prove the employer condoned behaviour it ultimately decides to use as misconduct justifying just cause).

2. Pay attention to how the employer treats you. Were you allowed to continue working normally during the investigation? Were you excluded from sensitive duties? Were you placed on an unpaid workplace suspension? 

3. Review the investigation process. Procedural flaws, bias, or unfair questioning can strengthen your case. For example, did the investigation meeting reasonably feel more like an “interrogation” rather than a fact-gathering meeting?

4. Seek legal advice early. The nuances of just cause versus wrongful dismissal are complex, and early guidance can make a big difference.

Final Thoughts

An employer justifying a termination for just cause is rare, because the courts treat it seriously. Employers must act consistently, fairly, and in good faith, and their actions during an investigation are often the most revealing. For employees, documenting everything and seeking early legal advice is critical. Minor inconsistencies in the employer’s approach can turn what looks like a strong claim into a winning wrongful dismissal case.

About the Author:

Sezar Bune is an employment lawyer with many years of experience representing employees in wrongful dismissals, severance packages negotiation, and workplace dispute cases. Sezar Bune helps clients navigate complex employment issues, protect their rights, and achieve fair outcomes. If you would like to discuss your own case, please contact our office to book a consultation.