Establishing just cause for dismissal remains a challenging bar to meet in employment law. Courts have consistently emphasized that summary dismissal is an extreme measure, reserved for only the most serious forms of misconduct that strike at the heart of the employment relationship. It is not enough for an employer to show that an employee made mistakes or performed poorly. The employer must demonstrate misconduct that is fundamentally incompatible with the employee’s obligations and that renders the continuation of the relationship untenable. Small errors and misconduct are better addressed through progressive discipline. In assessing just cause, courts undertake a contextual analysis that considers the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the surrounding circumstances, and whether dismissal is a proportionate response.

Tudor v Accurate Screen Ltd. (2026 ABKB 237)

In Tudor v Accurate Screen Ltd, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench considered whether an employer had just cause to dismiss a senior executive who misrepresented his academic qualifications. The plaintiff, Mr. Tudor, was hired in 2023 as Vice President of Business Development after representing on his resume that he was in the process of completing a Master of Business Administration (“MBA”), which he expected to be finished with in November 2023. In reality, Mr. Tutor had not even enrolled in any MBA program, had not taken any courses, and had only taken minimal preliminary steps towards possible enrollment. The employer relied on this representation in choosing to interview him and later hire him, particularly given that the role required strong analytical and business skills.

During his approximately seven months of employment, concerns emerged about Mr. Tudor’s performance, particularly his ability to complete a forecasting project requiring statistical and quantitative analysis. His work revealed significant deficiencies, prompting the employer to question his qualifications. As discussions about his education progressed, Mr. Tudor was found to be evasive and did not fully disclose the extent of his lack of academic credentials until shortly before his dismissal. On January 10, 2024, his employment was terminated for cause, based on both the misrepresentation in his resume and the mismatch between his claimed qualifications and his actual abilities.

The Court ultimately concluded that the employer had established just cause for dismissal. It found that Mr. Tudor’s representation that his MBA was “currently ongoing” and expected to be completed within months was not merely an error in judgment, but an intentional misrepresentation designed to enhance his candidacy. This dishonesty went directly to the root of the employment relationship, particularly given his senior executive role, where trust and integrity were paramount. The Court emphasized that employers are entitled to rely on the accuracy of representations made by candidates, especially at the executive level, and are not required to independently verify such claims.

In applying the contextual approach to just cause, the Court found that the misconduct was serious, deliberate, and directly related to the role’s core requirements. The misrepresentation not only influenced the hiring decision but also explained the Mr. Tutor’s inability to perform essential job functions, which was dishonest. Given the importance of honesty and the high level of trust expected of a senior executive, the Court held that the misconduct caused an irreparable breakdown in the employment relationship. As a result, dismissal was a proportionate response. Mr. Tutor’s wrongful dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.

This case is notable because it underscores the high legal threshold that employers must meet when alleging cause for termination. Rather than relying on vague dissatisfaction or isolated incidents, the decision highlights that employers must be able to point to clear, well-documented misconduct or performance issues that fundamentally undermine the employment relationship. It reinforces the idea that termination for cause is an exceptional measure. To establish just cause, one requires compelling, objective evidence showing that continued employment is no longer viable, and not merely a response to frustration, personality conflicts, or minor shortcomings.

How Suzanne Desrosiers Professional Corporation can help

At Suzanne Desrosiers Professional Corporation, we help both employees and employers deal with cases where just cause for dismissal is used to terminate an employee. Although the application of just cause for dismissal was used correctly in Tudor v Accurate Screen Ltd, we often find that employers end up misusing it for minor offences or as a means to avoid paying proper notice. Therefore, if you are an employer considering terminating an employee for just cause or an employee who has been terminated for just cause, please call us at (705) 268-6492 or email us at info@sdlawtimmins.com. One of our employment lawyers would be happy to speak with you about your situation.