Toronto employment law firm successfully defended a $78,925 severance judgment based on 10 months’ reasonable notice, plus damages for lost benefits.
TORONTO, ON, CANADA, October 9, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ — Lecker & Associates, a Toronto employment law firm representing employees, successfully defended a Court of Appeal ruling that holds an incoming building services provider responsible for an employee’s common-law notice entitlements when it chooses not to continue their employment.
The decision in Kondaj v. Crossbridge Condominium Services Ltd., 2026 ONCA 636 (CV-24-00716430), resolves a previously unanswered legal question affecting employees when building services contracts change hands.
The Court confirmed that responsibility rests with the incoming building services provider for the employee’s statutory and common law entitlements .
Lecker & Associates lawyers Kimberley Sebag and Ian Hurley represented Gazmend Kondaj, a Toronto building manager whose employment ended after the property management contract for the SoHo Hotel & Residences was awarded to a new provider.
“This decision provides meaningful protection for employees whose jobs may be affected by a change in building services providers,” said Kimberly Sebag. “An employee should not be left without their severance entitlements while the outgoing and incoming providers argue over who is responsible.”
Employee Left Between Two Service Providers
Mr. Kondaj was employed by Crossbridge Condominium Services Ltd. and worked as a building manager at the SoHo Hotel & Residences in Toronto.
When the SoHo Hotel & Residences awarded its property management contract to Duka Property Management Inc., Duka replaced Crossbridge as the building services provider. Duka chose not to continue Mr. Kondaj’s employment, while Crossbridge did not place him at another property.
Duka paid Mr. Kondaj three weeks of statutory termination pay and briefly continued his benefits. However, neither company paid him his common law reasonable notice entitlements. Each provider maintained that the other was responsible.
Mr. Kondaj brought a wrongful dismissal claim against both companies.
Kimberley Sebag of Lecker & Associates argued the summary judgment on Mr. Kondaj’s behalf. The motion judge ordered Duka to pay $78,925, based on 10 months of common law reasonable notice.
Before proceeding to the Superior Court, Mr. Kondaj offered to settle with both companies for $27,600. Both Companies rejected his offers. As a result, the court ultimately ordered Duka to pay $56,321.46 toward Mr. Kondaj’s legal costs.
Court of Appeal Upholds the Superior Court Judgment
Duka appealed the judgment and the costs award. Crossbridge also cross-appealed the decision concerning its legal costs.
Ian Hurley successfully defended the original judgment on behalf of Mr. Kondaj before the Court of Appeal.
The Court dismissed Duka’s appeal, upheld the substantial indemnity costs awarded to Mr. Kondaj and dismissed Crossbridge’s cross-appeal.
In its decision, the Court of Appeal confirmed that sections 56 and 75 of Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, 2000 must be read together. When an incoming building services provider chooses not to employ an affected worker, the legislation treats the new provider as though it terminated that employee.
The legal consequences extend beyond minimum termination and severance pay under employment standards legislation. The incoming provider is also responsible for common law reasonable notice.
Why the Decision Matters for Toronto Employees
Changes in service providers are common across Toronto condominiums, office buildings, hotels and other properties. These transitions can affect building managers, cleaners, security personnel and other employees who provide services on the premises.
Before this decision, no court had directly determined which provider was responsible for common law notice when an incoming building services provider declined to continue an existing employee’s employment.
The Court’s ruling provides important guidance while supporting the legislative goal of protecting employment continuity in an industry where service contracts frequently change hands.
Seek Advice Before Accepting A Severance Package
Employees should not assume that receiving statutory termination pay represents everything they are entitled to receive.
Common law notice can be considerably greater than employment standards minimums. The appropriate amount will depend on the employee’s age, length of service, position, compensation and the availability of comparable employment, among other considerations.
Employees in Toronto who lose their jobs after a building services contract changes hands should obtain legal advice before signing a release or accepting a severance package.
Lecker & Associates represents employees in Toronto in wrongful dismissal, severance, workplace discrimination, constructive dismissal and employment contract matters. The firm’s online severance calculator can provide a general estimate of potential entitlements, but every termination requires an assessment of the employee’s individual circumstances.
About Lecker & Associates
Lecker & Associates is a Toronto employment law firm with more than 35 years of experience representing employees. The firm advises and represents clients in wrongful dismissal, severance negotiations, workplace harassment, disability-related matters, employment contracts and other employment disputes.
For more information, contact Lecker & Associates at 416-223-5391, email intake@leckerslaw.com or book a no-charge initial assessment.
Bram A. Lecker
Leckers Law
+1 416-223-5391
Visit us on social media:
LinkedIn
Facebook
YouTube
X
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability
for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this
article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
Media gallery
