---
title: Just Cause Termination Lawyer Calgary
canonical_url: https://tzlawyers.ca/just-cause-termination-lawyer-calgary/
last_updated: 2026-09-11T13:03:17-04:00
plugin_version: 1.2.2
---

# Just Cause Termination Lawyer Calgary

Just Cause for Dismissal in Alberta
-----------------------------------

 A Just Cause termination can be one of the most devastating event for employees. On top of loss of employment, employee are almost always left without any compensation. There could also be reputation harms and loss of future career opportunity. But what makes "just cause" and how does the law recognize it? A termination for just cause is one of the most serious actions an employer can take. When just cause is established, an employee may be dismissed immediately without reasonable notice or pay in lieu of notice. However, the employer faces a high threshold and must prove that the employee's conduct was serious enough to justify ending the employment relationship without notice. In short, just cause cannot be invoked lightly. Because of those consequences, summary dismissal is sometimes described as the “capital punishment” of employment law. A disagreement, isolated mistake, minor breach of policy, or ordinary poor performance will not necessarily amount to sufficient cause. Where the employer cannot prove just cause, an employee may instead have a wrongful dismissal claim and may be entitled to a substantial severance package or common-law reasonable notice. What Is Just Cause for Dismissal in Alberta?
--------------------------------------------

 Just cause for dismissal exists where an employee's misconduct is sufficiently serious that continuing the employment relationship is no longer reasonable. The employer must prove the alleged misconduct and establish that immediate dismissal was a proportionate response in all the circumstances. Just cause is therefore different from simply having a reason to terminate an employee. Under Alberta employment law, most employers can end an indefinite employment relationship without cause if they provide the notice, termination pay, or pay in lieu of notice required by the applicable employment contract, employment standards legislation, and common law. A dismissal for cause is different. The employer is asserting that the employee's conduct was so serious that the employee has forfeited the usual right to notice and severance. TZ Law's broader [employment law services for employees](https://tzlawyers.ca/employee-employment-law/) address termination for cause alongside wrongful dismissal, severance disputes, employment contracts, harassment, and other workplace claims. Alberta Law on Just Cause
-------------------------

 Canadian courts do not determine just cause by asking only whether misconduct occurred. The court considers the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the surrounding circumstances, and whether termination was an appropriate and proportionate response. The leading Canadian authority is *McKinley v. BC Tel*, 2001 SCC 38. The Supreme Court of Canada rejected an automatic rule that dishonesty always amounts to just cause. Instead, the court must determine whether the employee's conduct, viewed in context, was sufficiently serious to cause a breakdown in the employment relationship. That contextual approach applies in Alberta. An employer seeking to prove just cause generally must establish: 1. What occurred: the alleged misconduct must be proven with evidence.
2. How serious the conduct was: the court considers the nature of the misconduct and its effect on the employment relationship.
3. The surrounding circumstances: length of service, position, prior discipline, workplace policies, past conduct, and other circumstances can matter.
4. Whether dismissal was proportionate: even proven misconduct may not justify immediate dismissal if progressive discipline would have been an appropriate response.
 
 The proportionality requirement is particularly important because most misconduct does not automatically justify summary dismissal. TZ Law's discussion of [Rodrigues v. Fort McKay Strategic Services LP](https://tzlawyers.ca/fired-for-an-accident-alberta-court-says-not-so-fast/) illustrates the point: the Alberta Court of King's Bench rejected just cause where an employer dismissed a long-service employee following a single workplace incident and failed to follow its progressive discipline process. For employers, the evidence available at the time of termination can be critical. Allegations of theft, dishonesty, harassment, violence, or other serious employee misconduct should normally be investigated before an employer acts. Workplace investigations form part of the broader employment-law risk management services TZ Law provides to employers. Examples of Conduct That May Constitute Just Cause
--------------------------------------------------

 There is no category of misconduct that automatically results in just cause in every case. The court must examine the employee's conduct in context and determine whether immediate dismissal was proportionate. Depending on the circumstances, conduct capable of supporting termination for cause can include: - theft or fraud;
- serious dishonesty;
- workplace violence;
- serious sexual harassment;
- deliberate safety violations;
- repeated insubordination;
- serious conflicts of interest;
- falsification of company records;
- intentional misuse of confidential information;
- serious or repeated breaches of workplace policies;
- wilful misconduct or wilful neglect of duties; and
- persistent poor performance following clear warnings and an opportunity to improve.
 
### Theft or Fraud

 Theft, fraud, falsifying expenses, misappropriating company funds, or deliberately taking an employer's property may constitute serious employee misconduct and can support immediate dismissal. However, an allegation of theft must still be proven. Suspicion is not sufficient simply because an employer believes an employee acted improperly. The employer should have evidence demonstrating what occurred and should ordinarily give the employee an opportunity to explain the circumstances. The value involved is relevant but not necessarily determinative. Even relatively modest misconduct can destroy trust where the act was deliberate and dishonest, particularly where the employee occupied a position involving money, confidential information, or significant responsibility. ### Dishonesty

 Dishonesty is frequently alleged as cause for dismissal, but employment law does not recognize an automatic rule that every lie amounts to just cause. Under *McKinley*, the central question is whether the nature and degree of the dishonesty were fundamentally inconsistent with the employee's obligations or sufficiently serious to destroy the employment relationship. A court may consider: - what the employee said or did;
- whether the conduct was intentional;
- whether the employee attempted to conceal the misconduct;
- whether the employer suffered harm;
- whether the employee held a position of trust;
- whether the employee provided a truthful explanation when questioned; and
- the employee's prior disciplinary and employment record.
 
 A single act of dishonesty can constitute sufficient cause, but the employer must still prove that dismissal was proportionate. ### Workplace Violence

 Serious workplace violence can justify immediate dismissal, particularly where an employee deliberately assaults, threatens, or intimidates another employee, customer, or member of the public. The nature of the incident remains important. A court may distinguish between deliberate violence, self-defence, provocation, an isolated altercation, and an ongoing pattern of threatening behaviour. Violence and harassment also engage employers' workplace-safety obligations. TZ Law has discussed those obligations in its article on [Alberta's workplace violence and harassment prevention framework](https://tzlawyers.ca/albertas-updated-workplace-violence-and-harassment-prevention-framework/). ### Serious Safety Violations

 Serious sexual harassment can amount to just cause, particularly where the behaviour is deliberate, repeated, coercive, or committed by an employee who holds authority over the affected person. However, the employer must still prove the alleged misconduct. The existence of a complaint does not itself establish sufficient cause for dismissal. Harassment allegations may also overlap with discrimination or protected grounds under human rights legislation. TZ Law's [human rights law practice](https://tzlawyers.ca/human-rights-lawyer/) addresses workplace discrimination and harassment claims alongside other employment disputes. ### Serious Safety Violations

 A deliberate safety violation that exposes employees, customers, or the public to significant danger may constitute serious misconduct. An accident or error in judgment, however, does not necessarily amount to wilful misconduct or wilful neglect. This distinction was central in *Rodrigues v. Fort McKay Strategic Services LP*, 2025 ABKB 414. As discussed in TZ Law's [analysis of the Rodrigues decision](https://tzlawyers.ca/fired-for-an-accident-alberta-court-says-not-so-fast/), the court found that termination was excessive after considering the employee's 12 years of service, the nature of the incident, the conduct of other employees, and the employer's failure to use progressive discipline. A serious consequence therefore does not automatically prove serious employee misconduct. ### Repeated Insubordination

 Repeated and deliberate refusal to comply with a lawful and reasonable direction may eventually establish just cause. Normally, an employer relying on repeated insubordination should be able to show: - a clear and reasonable direction;
- that the employee understood the direction;
- a deliberate refusal to comply;
- clear warnings concerning the consequences;
- prior discipline where appropriate; and
- continued misconduct despite those warnings.
 
 Where the employee's behaviour is capable of correction, progressive discipline is often important. Clear warnings give the employee an opportunity to correct the behaviour and demonstrate that termination was not the employer's first response to relatively minor misconduct. ### Conflict of Interest

 Employees owe obligations to their employer during the employment relationship, and a sufficiently serious conflict of interest may constitute cause for dismissal. Examples can include secretly competing with the employer, diverting business opportunities, accepting improper financial benefits, placing personal interests ahead of the employer's interests, or misusing confidential information. The employee's position matters. Senior executives, managers, fiduciaries, and employees entrusted with sensitive financial or commercial information may owe heightened obligations. ### Serious Breach of Company Policies

 A breach of a company policy does not automatically give an employer just cause. A court may consider whether: - the policy was reasonable;
- the employee knew about the policy;
- the policy was consistently enforced;
- the employee understood the consequences of a breach;
- the employee's conduct was deliberate;
- similar conduct had previously been tolerated; and
- a lesser form of discipline would have been sufficient.
 
 A properly drafted employment contract and workplace policies can help define expectations, but contractual wording cannot simply transform minor misconduct into just cause. This is one reason employers should obtain employment-law advice when preparing or revising employment agreements rather than relying on generic contractual language. Does Poor Performance Amount to Just Cause?
-------------------------------------------

 Poor performance can amount to just cause, but the threshold is high. An employer will generally need more than dissatisfaction with the employee's work. The employee should ordinarily know the required standard, receive clear warnings about deficiencies, receive a reasonable opportunity to improve, and understand that continued failure may result in termination. Poor performance therefore often requires progressive discipline rather than immediate dismissal. Before relying on performance as cause for dismissal, an employer should generally be able to demonstrate: 1. the required performance standard was reasonable;
2. the employee knew what was expected;
3. the employee failed to meet that standard;
4. the employer clearly communicated the deficiencies;
5. the employee received a reasonable opportunity to improve;
6. reasonable training or support was provided where appropriate; and
7. clear warnings stated that continued poor performance could lead to termination.
 
 An employer who dismisses an employee for cause simply because management has become dissatisfied may ultimately face a wrongful dismissal claim. Can One Incident Be Enough for Just Cause Termination in Alberta?
-----------------------------------------------------------------

 Yes. A single act can amount to just cause where the misconduct is sufficiently serious, but a single incident does not automatically permit immediate dismissal. The court considers the nature of the incident, the employee's position, intent, previous record, harm caused, and whether the employment relationship can reasonably continue. A single serious act involving theft, fraud, deliberate violence, significant harassment, sabotage, or a profound breach of trust may cross the threshold. Most misconduct will not. Severance Pay and Termination With Just Cause
---------------------------------------------

 **If an employer proves just cause, the employee may lose the right to termination notice, termination pay, and common-law reasonable notice. If the employer cannot prove cause, the employee may have a wrongful dismissal claim and could be entitled to significant pay in lieu of notice and other compensation.** That distinction can make a substantial financial difference. As TZ Law explains in its [guide to severance pay in Alberta](https://tzlawyers.ca/comprehensive-guide-to-severance-pay-in-alberta-know-your-rights/), minimum employment standards and common-law reasonable notice are separate concepts, and common-law severance can substantially exceed the statutory minimum. A wrongful dismissal claim may include compensation for: - salary during the reasonable notice period;
- bonuses and commissions;
- benefits;
- pension contributions;
- incentive compensation;
- other remuneration the employee would have received during the notice period; and
- in appropriate circumstances, additional compensation arising from bad faith in the manner of dismissal.
 
 The amount of reasonable notice can be substantial. TZ Law's article discussing [the 26-month reasonable notice award in Lischuk v. K-Jay Electric Ltd.](https://tzlawyers.ca/26-month-notice-period/) demonstrates how significant common-law notice can become depending on an employee's circumstances. The terms of the employment contract also matter. A properly drafted termination clause can affect an employee's common-law entitlement, while an unenforceable clause may leave the employee entitled to reasonable notice. TZ Law's analysis of [Plotnikoff v. Associated Engineering Alberta Ltd.](https://tzlawyers.ca/alberta-court-rejects-termination-clause-plotnikoff-v-associated-engineering-alberta/) discusses how an Alberta court rejected a termination clause and awarded common-law notice beyond the Employment Standards Code minimum. What Happens If the Employer Cannot Prove Just Cause?
-----------------------------------------------------

 If an employer alleges cause but cannot prove it, the employee's termination may amount to wrongful dismissal. An employer cannot determine the legal outcome simply by writing “termination for cause” in the employee's termination letter. If challenged, the employer must prove the misconduct and demonstrate that dismissal was justified. Where cause fails, the former employer may owe the employee reasonable notice or pay in lieu of notice. TZ Law's employee-side [employment law practice](https://tzlawyers.ca/employee-employment-law/) specifically includes representation in just-cause termination, wrongful dismissal, severance, contract, harassment, and litigation matters. Additional damages may also become relevant if the employer acted in bad faith in the manner of dismissal. Depending on the evidence, concerns can arise where an employer: - fabricated or materially exaggerated alleged misconduct;
- conducted a fundamentally unfair investigation;
- publicly accused the employee of theft or dishonesty without sufficient evidence;
- attempted to use an unsupported cause allegation to avoid paying severance;
- discriminated against the employee;
- retaliated against the employee for exercising workplace rights; or
- otherwise acted dishonestly or in bad faith during the termination.
 
Does a Just Cause Termination Affect Employment Insurance?
----------------------------------------------------------

 A cause allegation can affect an employee's Employment Insurance application, but the employer does not make the final determination concerning EI entitlement. The Record of Employment may identify the employer's position concerning the employee's termination, but the government determines whether the circumstances constitute misconduct for Employment Insurance purposes. An employee facing an alleged-cause dismissal should preserve the termination letter, employment contract, performance reviews, disciplinary records, emails, workplace policies, text messages, investigation records, and other evidence addressing the alleged misconduct. Protect Your Career and Reputation
----------------------------------

 A dismissal for cause can affect much more than termination pay. Allegations involving theft, fraud, dishonesty, sexual harassment, violence, or other serious misconduct may affect an employee's professional reputation and ability to obtain future employment. Employees should therefore avoid assuming that an employer's characterization of the incident is legally correct. If you have been terminated for cause: 1. **Request the allegations in writing and do not sign any warning letters/performance improvement plan if you do not agree with the content.**
2. **Preserve the evidence, including emails, messages, policies, performance reviews, and disciplinary records.**
3. **Review your employment contract, particularly any termination provisions.**
4. **Do not assume that the words “just cause” eliminate your right to severance.**
5. **Keep records of your search for comparable employment, because mitigation may become relevant to a wrongful dismissal claim.**
6. **Do not sign a severance release before understanding what compensation may be owed.**
7. **Obtain legal advice where the allegation could affect your career or professional reputation.**
 
 Where the employer cannot establish cause, the difference between summary dismissal and a successful wrongful dismissal claim can amount to many months of compensation. Speak With an Alberta Employment Lawyer on Just Cause
-----------------------------------------------------

 Just cause is a high legal threshold. The issue is not simply whether the employee did something wrong. The court must determine whether the proven conduct, considered in all of the circumstances, was serious enough to justify immediate dismissal without reasonable notice or pay in lieu of notice. TZ Law's [termination for cause practice](https://tzlawyers.ca/termination-for-cause-lawyer/) assists employees accused of serious misconduct and facing dismissal without severance, while the firm's broader [employment law practice](https://tzlawyers.ca/employee-employment-law/) addresses wrongful dismissal, severance, employment contracts, litigation, harassment, and related workplace disputes. Employers also need to exercise caution before alleging cause. The failure to prove just cause can convert what was intended to be an immediate dismissal into a potentially significant wrongful dismissal claim. Whether the allegation involves theft, dishonesty, poor performance, workplace violence, harassment, wilful misconduct, insubordination, or another workplace incident, the evidence, context, proportionality of the employer's response, and terms of the employment relationship must all be considered.