Basyal v. Mac's Convenience Stores Inc.
Prakash Basyal
Law Firm / Organization
Allevato Quail & Roy
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

K. Smith

Arthur Gortificaion Cajes
Law Firm / Organization
Allevato Quail & Roy
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

K. Smith

Edlyn Tesorero
Law Firm / Organization
Allevato Quail & Roy
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

K. Smith

Bishnu Khadka
Law Firm / Organization
Allevato Quail & Roy
Law Firm / Organization
Not Specified
Lawyer(s)

K. Smith

Mac’s Convenience Stores Inc.
Overseas Immigration Services Inc.
Overseas Career and Consulting Services Ltd.
Trident Immigration Services Ltd.

Case Overview:
Plaintiffs Prakash Basyal, Arthur Gortificaion Cajes, Edlyn Tesorero, and Bishnu Khadka filed a class action against Mac’s Convenience Stores Inc., Overseas Immigration Services Inc., Overseas Career and Consulting Services Ltd., and Trident Immigration Services Ltd. The case involved alleged unlawful recruitment fees charged to foreign workers recruited under Canada’s Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP).

Legal Issues:
The court addressed two main issues: whether Mac’s could be held vicariously liable for the recruitment agencies’ actions, and if the agencies breached fiduciary duties by charging unauthorized fees. The plaintiffs argued that Mac’s, as principal, should be responsible for the actions of its agents, who allegedly charged workers excessive fees for job placements that sometimes did not materialize upon their arrival in Canada.

Summary Trial Findings:
Justice Matthews determined that Mac’s could be vicariously liable if it authorized Overseas Immigration Services to act on its behalf in hiring foreign workers. The court applied modified Bazley factors to assess the relationship between Mac’s and its agents, focusing on agency and authority in recruiting the plaintiffs.

Outcome:
Justice Matthews granted the summary trial application for determining vicarious liability and fiduciary breach. However, specific cost and award amounts were not detailed in the summary judgment provided, as these depended on subsequent findings and damage assessments regarding the unlawful fees charged by the agencies.

Supreme Court of British Columbia
S1510284
Employment law
Plaintiff