This was an Appeal by the Defendant employer.

Among other things, the employer appealed the lower Court’s decision at the opening of the summary trial hearing to permit amendment to the employee’s pleadings (pursuant to Rule 3.65) to specifically plead constructive dismissal.

Noting the strong presumption in favour of allowing amendments after the close of pleadings in the absence of a compelling reason to refuse, the Court considered whether the impugned amendment had caused “significant harm” to the employer’s litigation interests or otherwise contravened public interest in promoting expeditious and economical dispute resolution. The Court found it did not.

In so concluding, the Court observed that the issue of constructive dismissal could not have taken the Defendant employer by surprise, having been raised previously by the employee and addressed in summary trial briefs submitted by both parties. Moreover, the Court found that the employer had had opportunity to raise or challenge evidence in response to the amendment and that ample time had been afforded for the employer to consider its position.

This part of the Appeal was therefore denied.