29 Jan 2024

Mittra v. Royal Bank of Canada et al

Firms involved

Gardiner Roberts LLP, Lenczner Slaght LLP

Plaintiff

AIDAN MITTRA
Law Firm
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Lawyer(s)

Kevin W. Fisher

Soma Ray-Ellis

Defendant

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA
Law Firm
Lenczner Slaght LLP
Lawyer(s)

Matthew Peter Sammon

David Salter

RBC INVESTOR SERVICES TRUST
Law Firm
Lenczner Slaght LLP
Lawyer(s)

Matthew Peter Sammon

David Salter

  • Facts: Aidan Mittra was employed by RBC in various roles, culminating in a temporary expatriate assignment to Toronto from London. His employment was terminated following an investigation into financial dealings with another employee.
  • Issues/Main Discussion: The case debated whether Mittra's employment contract could only be terminated with reasonable notice under Ontario common law, the validity of termination, and entitlement to damages, including unpaid compensation.
  • Ruling: The court concluded that UK law governed Mittra's employment contract, not Ontario common law. RBC had just cause for termination. Mittra's claim was dismissed except for payment of unpaid deferred compensation that vested in December 2018 in the amount of $244,431.64. RBC's counterclaim was allowed, Mr. Mittra is ordered to pay to RBC the amounts of £98,363.98 (in respect of the 2017-18 U.K. tax year) and $52,028.08 (in respect of the 2019 Canadian tax year).

Court

Superior Court of Justice - Ontario

Case Number

CV-19-624677

Practice Area

Labour & Employment Law

Amount

$ 244,432

Winner

Defendant

Trial Start Date

Download documents

Latest News

Ontario's strong-mayor powers used predominantly for hiring and firing: report

‘They think they have the right to dictate things’

Employers of Choice 2026: submissions close soon!

Half of Canadians say immigration levels too high: IRCC