In the Alberta Court of King's Bench decision of Lischuk v K-Jay Electric Ltd., 2025 ABKB 460, the Court found "exceptional circumstances" that warranted going beyond the usual...
In the Alberta Court of King's Bench decision of Lischuk v K-Jay Electric Ltd., 2025 ABKB 460, the Court found "exceptional circumstances" that warranted going beyond the usual "cap" of 24 months for common law notice periods in Alberta.
The plaintiff employee, Glenn Lischuk was a lifelong employee of the defendant employer, K-Jay Electric ("K-Jay"), starting at the age of 21 as a helper, until his termination at age 58 where he was working in the position of General Manager. He served the company for 37 years and was terminated without cause in 2013.
At the time of the trial in 2025, the plaintiff was not working, and he did not look for other work after his termination in 2013. Despite this, the Court did not find that the plaintiff had failed to mitigate his damages. The Court emphasized an employer's onus of proof in demonstrating a failure to mitigate.
The plaintiff was also a shareholder in K-Jay, through his holding company (the "Holding Company"). Throughout his employment, the plaintiff received payments from K-Jay associated with these shareholdings. Upon the plaintiff's termination, K-Jay triggered a repurchase of these shares.
There was no written employment contract between K-Jay and the plaintiff.
Main Issues
1. Reasonable Notice Period
Historically, or at least since 1983, Alberta...
Russian propaganda is spreading false statements that the account of the head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, Kyrylo Budanov, was allegedly created with...