The court emphasized the risk of conflicting decisions if the action was split across jurisdictions
The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia upheld its jurisdiction and converted an employment dispute involving a former employee and two subsidiaries of an international corporation into an action.
The applicant was employed as a product line director by one of the subsidiaries from November 2019 until his termination in October 2022. He alleged wrongful dismissal and negligent misrepresentation against the respondents. Initially, he applied for a position with the other subsidiary while residing in Houston, Texas. After accepting the offer, the employment was conditional upon obtaining a UK visa. During the visa application process, he was offered temporary employment with the first subsidiary, requiring him to relocate to Nova Scotia. His temporary contract was later extended, and he was offered indefinite employment with the first subsidiary.
The respondents challenged the court’s jurisdiction over the second subsidiary, arguing that there was no substantial connection between Nova Scotia and the second subsidiary. However, the court found that the two subsidiaries acted as common employers, noting the intertwined nature of their operations and control over the applicant’s employment.
The presiding judge concluded that the common employer doctrine applied. The court found significant connections between the companies, such as shared payroll and employment expenses, indicating a relationship of common control. The court determined that the actions of both entities should be considered collectively, affirming Nova Scotia’s jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court also considered whether Nova Scotia was a convenient forum for the dispute. The respondents argued for the UK or Newfoundland and Labrador as more appropriate forums, citing the location of key witnesses and applicable laws. However, the judge found that the costs and logistical challenges of relocating the proceedings to another jurisdiction did not outweigh the benefits of retaining the case in Nova Scotia. The court emphasized the interconnected nature of the claims and the risk of conflicting decisions if the case were split between multiple jurisdictions.
The court granted the respondents’ motion to convert the application into an action due to the complexity and expected duration of the proceedings. The court noted that the matter involved multiple parties, witnesses across various jurisdictions, and intricate legal issues that could not be adequately addressed in a summary application.
The court highlighted that the legal principles governing wrongful dismissal and negligent misrepresentation required a detailed factual analysis, which would be better suited to a full trial. The court also acknowledged that the streamlined process of an application would not suffice, given the significant credibility issues and extensive evidence involved.
