Help is just a call away! Talk to an HR expert now. +1 866-606-0149

Case Study: “We Thought We Had Just Cause” — When Employer Assumptions Collapse at the Tribunal

Dec 5, 2025 | Employment Law, HR Case Study

Lessons from Kiiveri v. Four Seasons Whistler Hotel Limited Partnership (2025 BCCRT 1613)

When employers believe they have just cause, they often assume they can terminate immediately and skip providing notice. But as this case shows, tribunals look for clear, consistent evidence, proper warnings, and proof that the employment relationship was truly irreparable. Four Seasons Whistler thought their case was strong — until the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) disagreed.

Background

Jeffrey Kiiveri, a massage therapist at the Four Seasons Whistler, was terminated without notice in March 2024. He filed a small-claims wrongful dismissal complaint seeking $5,000 — the maximum CRT monetary limit.

Four Seasons argued it had just cause, pointing to:

  • Past violations of clock-in/clock-out and cafeteria policies
  • A tense phone call where Kiiveri allegedly raised his voice
  • An off-duty bar incident where coworkers felt “uncomfortable”
  • Vague allegations of further conduct issues 

Kiiveri argued he deserved 4-6 months’ notice and disputed the allegations.

What the Tribunal Found

The CRT rejected Four Seasons’ just-cause argument, not because the behaviour was perfect, but because the evidence simply did not support termination without notice.

1. Old Issues Are Not Ongoing Just Cause

The employer relied heavily on warnings given in 2022 about procedural breaches.

But the tribunal found no evidence of repeated violations after those warnings.

 

Under Ogden v. CIBC, employers must:

  • Give a clear warning,
  • Give time to improve, and
  • Show the employee failed to correct their behaviour. 

Here, the employee improved, so those issues could not justify firing him in 2024.

2. One Unprofessional Phone Call ≠ Breakdown of the Relationship

The CRT agreed Kiiveri’s raised-voice phone call in 2023 was unprofessional.

However:

  • He was reprimanded
  • Expectations were communicated
  • There were no repeat incidents 

So the conduct did not justify termination.

3. Off-Duty Conduct Must Be Serious and Connected

The bar incident? Awkward, yes. Misconduct, no.

  • No evidence of harassment
  • No details suggesting harmful or inappropriate behaviour
  • Employees were merely “uncomfortable” 

Off-duty behaviour only supports just cause if it impacts the workplace in a serious, material way. That was not the case here.

4. Vague Allegations Carry No Weight

Four Seasons vaguely claimed that “subsequent investigations” revealed more problems, but provided no evidence due to “fear of retaliation.”

The tribunal rejected this outright.

5. No Just Cause → Means Notice Required

Applying McKinley v. BC Tel, the CRT held:

  • Misconduct occurred,
  • But it did not amount to an irreparable breakdown of the employment relationship. 

Therefore, the Four Seasons owed reasonable notice.

6. Notice Assessment

With 17 months of service as a massage therapist and no evidence supporting a longer notice period, the CRT awarded 2 months’ pay, minus already-paid severance.

Total payable judgment: $5,341.77

Employer Takeaways: What Went Wrong and How to Avoid It

1. Just Cause Is VERY Hard to Prove

Most employers overestimate the strength of their case. Tribunals require:

  • Clear evidence
  • Progressive discipline
  • Documented follow-ups
  • Proof that the relationship cannot continue

Four Seasons had none of this for their 2024 case.

2. Old Discipline Does Not Stay Alive Forever

If the employee improves, past issues cannot be resurrected to justify termination later.

3. One Incident Rarely Equals Just Cause

Unless the behaviour is:

  • Serious
  • Repeated
  • Intentional
  • Harmful to the employer 

…it won’t meet the legal threshold.

4. If It’s Not Documented, It Didn’t Happen

Vague comments like “other employees felt uncomfortable” carry zero weight without:

  • Dates
  • Witness accounts
  • Investigation notes
  • Written complaints

5. Off-Duty Misconduct Must Be Job-Related

Being “awkward” in public does not justify firing someone.

Tribunals look for:

  • Reputational harm
  • Safety impacts
  • Policy violations
  • Impact on workplace relationships

None existed here.

6. ESA Minimums Do NOT Override Common-Law Notice

Four Seasons believed notice was capped at 2 weeks.

 

The tribunal reminded them:

  • Employment Standards Act minimums do not replace common-law notice.

Only a well-drafted contract clause can limit notice — and none was shown here.

7. Evidence Beats Assumptions Every Time

Four Seasons assumed their concerns were enough. The tribunal needed:

  • Documents
  • Dates
  • Investigation records
  • Proof of ongoing problems 

They didn’t receive what was needed because Four Seasons didn’t have it.

Why This Case Matters

This case is a textbook example of an employer thinking:

“We definitely have just cause.”

…only to learn at the hearing that they didn’t even come close.

The message is clear:

**Just cause is the capital punishment of employment law.

If you’re going to use it, you need flawless evidence and a well-documented process.**

Four Seasons lacked both, and it cost them.

HRC Tip: Before proceeding with just cause, slow down and double-check your investigation, documentation, and use of progressive discipline. A quick internal audit, or a brief consult with an HR Advisor or legal expert can save your organization from a costly and avoidable wrongful dismissal ruling. Need a second set of eyes? Depending on your program, HRC members can contact the Advisory team or the HRC Law team via the HUB for guidance and advice. 

Source: Kiiveri v. Four Seasons Whistler Hotel Limited Partnership – Civil Resolution Tribunal