Breach of Minutes of Settlement

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal considered an application made by the employer for the refund of all settlement funds paid to the prior applicant due to the violation of the minutes of settlement. 1

The relevant clause of the minutes set out the response which the employee had agreed to provide to any person who inquired:

Confidentiality: The Applicant may disclose the terms of these Minutes of Settlement to [their] immediate family, legal and financial advisors, on the condition that they also agree to maintain strict confidentiality of these Minutes of Settlement. Upon inquiry by any person about the resolution of the Application or conclusion of the Applicant’s employment with [the applicant corporation], the Applicant shall simply state that all matters have been resolved. The Applicant will make no mention of, or allude in any way whatsoever to, the receipt of money or the amount of money received from [the applicant corporation] in this Settlement.

In addition, the minutes also contained a non-disparagement clause which read as follows:

Mutual Non-Disparagement: The parties agree that the purpose of this Settlement is to resolve any issues the Applicant has with the Respondents on a confidential basis and without any disparagement of the parties. Accordingly, the parties agree to refrain from making any oral, written or electronic communications about each other that are untrue, defamatory, disparaging, or derogatory, or acting in any manner that would be likely to damage the opposite party’s reputation in the eyes of customers, regulators, the general public, or employees, unless required by law. This non-disparagement includes but is not limited to any electronic communications through social media (such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube, Snapchat, etc.)

The employee, contrary to these terms, posted the following statement on Linkedin:

To all those inquiring, I have come to a resolution in my Human Rights Complaint against [the applicant corporation] and [the individual applicant] for sex discrimination.

The employer requested by email and subsequently by letter that this post be removed. One month later, the employee revised the linkedin post to read:

To all those inquiring, all matters have been resolved in my Human Rights Complaint against [the applicant corporation] and [the individual applicant] for sex discrimination.

The application made to enforce the minutes was then made, after which the post was removed. The original post was present for 12 months. The revised post was live for 1.5 months.

The tribunal found that the minutes were clear and that the contract had been breached. The minutes contained a provision which required the settlement funds be repaid in the event of a breach. This was ordered.

 

  1. L.C.C. v M.M.

Leave a Reply