Hapnin Enterprises did not have just cause to terminate a long-standing employee, the B.C. Supreme Court has ruled — awarding her 18 months’ notice for wrongful dismissal after nearly three decades of services.
The plaintiff, N.P., alleged she was wrongfully dismissed from her employment with the defendant, a business operating in Nakusp, B.C. She had been employed since June 1993, starting as a gas attendant before transitioning into a bookkeeping role. Over the years, N.P. assumed responsibilities that included payroll and managing various software systems crucial to the business operations.
In 1995, W.J. acquired full ownership of the company. N.P. and W.J. developed an intimate personal relationship during the last five years of his life. Upon W.J.’s passing around August 30, 2020, his children, M.J. and H.J., assumed control of the business, with H.J. taking on the principal operational role.
Unfamiliar with the day-to-day operations, H.J. relied heavily on N.P. for training and guidance. Initially, their working relationship was positive, but it deteriorated by August 2021. On August 10, following a stressful interaction, N.P. left work due to health issues related to stress and was advised to take a medical leave of absence.
Worker issued her own ROE
While on medical leave, N.P. generated her own Record of Employment (ROE) using the company’s Ceridian payroll software to support her claim for benefits. She had routinely performed this task for herself and other employees in her role as bookkeeper. Upon her return on October 20, 2021, she was presented with a new employment contract that reduced her hours and days of work. N.P. declined to sign the new contract.
On November 3, H.J. called a meeting with N.P., during which she asked a series of prepared questions in the presence of a third party. Following the meeting, N.P. was sent home. Shortly thereafter, on November 9, 2021, the defendant terminated her employment, alleging “fraudulent misconduct with respect to the Company, specifically but not limited to, issuing a Record of Employment fraudulently in the name of someone deceased, paying yourself for hours you did not work, insubordination/insolence, and breach of Company confidentiality and trust.”
Employer’s allegations
The defendant filed a report with the RCMP and maintained in court that it had just cause for dismissal based on several allegations:
Unauthorized raises and vacation allowances: The defendant claimed N.P. gave herself raises and additional vacation without authorization. However, the court found that these were approved by W.J. before his passing. “The defendant has failed to prove the raises the plaintiff received or the vacation entitlements were unauthorized,” Justice Betton stated.
Improper issuance of the ROE: The defendant argued that N.P. fraudulently issued the ROE under the name of a deceased person (W.J.). The court noted that while there were errors, there was no fraudulent intent. N.P. believed the system auto-populated the issuer’s name and was unaware of the mistake. “I accept that there were important errors in the document. I am unable to conclude, however, that the plaintiff deliberately caused those errors,” the judge wrote.
Theft of a Bluetooth speaker: N.P. was accused of stealing a speaker given by a BC Lottery Corporation (BCLC) representative. The court found that N.P. believed the speaker was a personal gift and returned it upon request. “I am not able to attribute any malice nor make any finding that the plaintiff subjectively intended to steal any property of the defendant,” Justice Betton concluded.
Attempting to cancel the company’s lottery licence: After her termination, N.P. contacted BCLC to remove her name from the company’s licence, which the defendant interpreted as an attempt to harm the business. The court disagreed, stating that her actions were reasonable. “I am unable to conclude that the plaintiff acted maliciously or with any intent to harm the defendant,” the judge found.
Overpayment for hours not worked: The defendant alleged N.P. paid herself for hours she did not work. The court found the employer’s evidence insufficient, noting that N.P. had openly communicated her hours to H.J., who had confirmed them. “The defendant’s evidence on this point is simply inadequate,” the court stated.
Acts of insubordination: The court examined incidents cited by the defendant and found no substantiation for claims of insubordination. Communications between N.P. and H.J. showed a willingness on N.P.’s part to assist and maintain professionalism.
Onus on employer to prove cause
Justice Betton emphasized that the onus is on the employer to prove just cause for termination and that a contextual approach must be taken, considering the severity and circumstances of the alleged misconduct. The court found that the defendant failed to meet this burden.
“It is my conclusion that the defendant lacked just cause for termination without notice. The defendant has not proved any deceitful/dishonest conduct,” Justice Betton wrote.
The court awarded N.P. damages equivalent to 18 months’ notice, considering her age (47), length of service (28 years), and the nature of her position. The total award amounted to $13,309.42 after accounting for income she earned from subsequent employment.
N.P. also sought aggravated and punitive damages, alleging that the manner of her dismissal caused mental distress. However, the court did not find sufficient evidence to support these claims. “I am unable to find the basis for an award,” Justice Betton stated regarding aggravated damages.
For more information, see Plank v Hapnin Enterprises Ltd., 2024 BCSC 1949 (CanLII).
