THOMSON v UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA, 2014 ABQB 434
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
The Defendant, the Governors of the University of Alberta (“University”), applied to strike the Statement of Claim of the Plaintiff, Alan Thomson (“Dr. Thomson”), pursuant to Rule 3.68, on the basis that the Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the Claim relating to Dr. Thomson’s employment. Dr. Thomson’s Claim alleged that the conduct of the University constituted a repudiation of the employment agreement and amounted to constructive dismissal. The University argued that the collective agreement governing employment with the University contained a dispute resolution process, and as such the Court was not the proper forum.
The Court held that, on an Application under Rule 3.68:
(a) a pleading will not be struck unless it is plain and obvious the Action will fail;
(b) the Court must assume the facts in the Statement of Claim can be proved; and
(c) the Application must fail if there is a chance that the Plaintiff might succeed.
The Court held that the dispute must be resolved via the collective agreement and the comprehensive grievance and arbitration procedures therein. The Defendant’s Application was granted.View CanLII Details