Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Courts — Jurisdiction — Collective agreement — Exclusive jurisdiction — Whether, in the absence of the requisite legislative intent, the exclusive jurisdiction model adopted by this Court in Weber v. Ontario Hydro, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929, should be applied to all labour relations legislation — Whether the Weber principles been diluted so extensively that our Courts are now refusing to exercise their inherent or residual jurisdiction where necessary to provide effective redress to parties.

Mr. Beaulieu was employed as a professor by the University of Alberta from 2000. His employment included research chair positions supported by funding, and was subject to the terms of a collective agreement authorized by the Post-secondary Learning Act, S.A. 2003, c. P-19.5. Starting in 2006, there have been multiple proceedings under the collective agreement involving Mr. Beaulieu, the Respondents, and others. In August 2012, Mr. Beaulieu filed a statement of claim against the Respondents for harassment, denial of access to research funding records, breach of a settlement agreement, breach of confidentiality, defamation, intentional infliction of mental suffering, and a failure to stop disciplinary proceedings to accommodate his medical condition. He sought damages and an accounting of research funding. The Respondents filed a statement of defence and advised Mr. Beaulieu’s counsel of their position that the court lacked jurisdiction. Mr. Beaulieu applied for an interlocutory injunction with respect to the dispute resolution proceedings under the collective agreement. The Respondents applied to strike the statement of claim, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction because the collective agreement provided an exclusive forum for resolution of the dispute.

The chambers judge struck the statement of claim, declined to grant an injunction and awarded double Column 4 costs against Mr. Beaulieu. On January 2, 2014, Mr. Beaulieu’s employment with the University was terminated. He then filed a complaint under the collective agreement regarding his existing research funding. The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Beaulieu’s appeal.