Just Cause in False Expenses of $250 – President of Operations

 

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, in December of 2023, upheld a trial judgment dismissing the wrongful dismissal claim of the plaintiff for just cause, based on dishonesty. 1

The plaintiff held a senior position with the defendant as President of Operations, earning an annual income between $750,000 to $1 million.

The allegations of cause were straightforward. It was accepted that the plaintiff had submitted fraudulent expense reports on two occasions, totaling roughly $250 and further that he had failed to confess to his transgressions when he was confronted with this issues and lied to senior management.

The Court of Appeal found that there was considerable evidence before the trial judge to allow the conclusion that this conduct led to a loss of confidence in the plaintiff:

Mr. Mechalchuk was in the most senior management position as the President of the company which commanded a high level of authority, responsibility and trust. His responsibilities included signing authority and his income and responsibilities were commensurate with Galaxy Motors’ expectations of him;

  •       The employee handbook specifically provided that “falsifying records or information” was considered a serious offence that due to its severity would lead to dismissal from employment;

  •       Mr. Mechalchuk submitted the Parksville restaurant receipts as being business-related when he knew that they were personal in nature;

  •       He submitted the receipts as business expenses by writing the names of other Galaxy Motors employees for the purposes of indicating the meals had been with them, when he knew that was not the case; and

  •       He breached his employer’s trust by submitting false expense receipts and being untruthful about them when given an opportunity to explain. When confronted by his employer about the receipts during the July 11, 2022 meeting, instead of admitting what he had done, Mr. Mechalchuk repeated his account. Unbeknownst to him, Ms. Jones had contacted some of the persons identified on the receipts and was aware that they had not been present.

 

The trial decision was upheld.

  1. Mechalchuk v. Galaxy Motors BCCA; trial BCSC

Leave a Reply