Background

• Plaintiff (Respondent): Christopher Plotnikoff, employed by the defendant as a Civil Engineering CAD Technologist for nearly 10 years.
• Defendant (Appellant): Associated Engineering Alberta Ltd., terminated Plotnikoff without cause in April 2022, offering six weeks' pay ($7,163.37) under the Employment Standards Code.
• Plotnikoff sued for wrongful dismissal, arguing he was entitled to reasonable notice under common law.

Trial Court Decision (2023)

• Found that the employment contract did not explicitly extinguish Plotnikoff’s right to common law notice.
• Awarded him 10 months of reasonable notice, rejecting arguments to reduce damages for lack of mitigation.

Appeal Grounds

1. Misinterpretation of the employment agreement regarding notice entitlements.
2. Excessive reasonable notice period of 10 months.
3. Failure to consider mitigation efforts.
4. General unreasonableness of the decision.

Appeal Court Findings

1. Contract Interpretation

   • Common law presumes reasonable notice unless explicitly removed.
   • Clause 4(c) in the agreement lacked clear language to extinguish Plotnikoff’s common law rights.
   • Ambiguities in employment contracts are resolved in favor of employees.

2. Reasonable Notice Period

   • A 10-month notice period was justified based on Plotnikoff’s long service, specialized role, and limited employment opportunities.
   • No palpable error in the trial court’s application of the Bardal factors.

3. Mitigation

   • While Plotnikoff did not actively seek work initially, the employer failed to show that reasonable mitigation efforts would have secured him comparable employment within the notice period.

4. Disposition

   • Appeal dismissed in full; trial judgment upheld.
   • Costs and interest to be resolved separately if not agreed upon.