Call us for a FREE 30 minute phone consultation at 416-907-9249 or submit a callback request
Andrew Monkhouse – Managing Partner, Owner
416-907-9249 x 225
Andrew has worked tirelessly for clients in Civil Litigation specializing in Employment, Human Rights, and Disability Insurance Law.
Prior to founding Monkhouse Law, Andrew worked for Canada’s largest labour and employment firm and for the government of Canada. He has proudly advised and represented employees, as well as employers.
Andrew is the Convener (organizer) of the Osgoode Cup, Canada’s largest legal competition held on an annual basis. He has in the past spoken as a guest speaker at Osgoode Hall Law School and the Humber College Paralegal program.
Andrew is an Ontario Bar Association Labour and Employment Law section executive with responsibilities covering the provision of ongoing legal education.
You can also follow Andrew on Twitter: Follow @andrewmonkhouse
Andrew has successfully represented clients before all levels of court in Ontario, including the Superior Court, the Divisional Appeals Court, and the Court of Appeal. He has also appeared with success before before the Human Rights Tribunal, and numerous other administrative bodies.
Recent Notable cases (note: each case is individual and past success does not guarantee future success):
Ruston v. Keddco: Trial Decision: Andrew represented an 11 year President of the company who was terminated by the owners after accusations of fraud. After an 11 day trial the $1.7 Million dollar fraud claim was found to be entirely without merit and the President was awarded a long notice period (19 months), his full bonus during the notice period, and $125,000 in damages between punitive and moral damages for the behaviour and tactics of the Defendant.
Ruston v. Keddco: Costs Decision: Monkhouse law was awarded the full amount requested for legal fees in the Ruston case, being $546,684.73, which is the largest amount of costs awarded to a wrongfully terminated employee that has been reported. The trial judge commented on how prepared Monkhouse Law was at the trial in awarding that amount.
Herzuk v. Kleiman: Monkhouse Law was fully successful on preliminary matters before a Master limiting the scope of trial. Because of the preliminary result the Defendant conceded right after the release of the preliminary decision by accepting the Plaintiff’s previous offer.
Journeymen v. Core One: Andrew represented an employer on a preliminary matter before the Labour Board and was able to resist both preliminary union motions to the benefit of the employer to be able to argue after acquired cause for conduct after termination and also that the initial termination was a justified layoff.
Sondhi v. Deloitte Management Services LP: Class Action Certification: In a two-part certification process (see part one) Monkhouse Law and co-counsel Landy Marr Kats LLP certified a document reviewer class action relating to overtime, vacation and statutory holiday pay for legal document reviewers at Deloitte. Justice Perell recognizes Monkhouse law’s expertise in Employment Law regarding the suitability for certification. Class counsel was awarded $353,790.88 for their work on the certification hearing.
Ott v. Canadian Standard Home Services: Default Judgment Decision: Monkhouse Law received an order including overtime pay and punitive damages on a delinquent defendant in the amount of $98,121.81, including legal fees.
Bovin et al v. Over the Rainbow Packaging Services Inc: Default Judgment Decision: The Defendant failed to defend the action resulting in a default judgment against them, including moral damages and 24 months notice for two employees who were constructively dismissed.
Holmes v. Hatch Ltd.: Summary Judgment Decision: Andrew increased the notice period from the 25.5 weeks offered to 18 months (77.4 weeks) for a Project Manager and Senior Water Resources Engineer. The award is more than triple the severance offered by defeating a complicated severance provision which attempted to limit the employee’s notice.
Johar v Best Buy Canada: Final Summary Judgment Decision: Andrew won the case without calling a single witness by bringing a summary judgment motion. He assisted an employee terminated for cause in his claim against Best Buy, and was fully successful in proving wrongful dismissal.
Johar v Best Buy Canada: Costs Decision: Andrew won a cost award of $27,500 for his client to help pay legal fees on the decision against Best Buy. This award was 50% the amount of the total severance and is one of the highest cost awards as a percentage of total awards given out.
Paquette v TeraGo Networks Inc.: Ontario Court of Appeal Decision: As the trial judge denied the Plaintiff his bonus Monkhouse Law appealed the case successfully to the Court of Appeal, which ruled that employees are owed bonuses during their notice periods. With Andrew’s assistance the employee received an additional $58,386.64 in bonus, plus a contribution to legal fees.
Paquette v TeraGo Networks Inc.: Trial Costs Decision: In a further costs decision relating to the Paquette case Andrew was successful in getting the Court to award $31,000.00 to cover the legal fees of the terminated employee.
Paquette v TeraGo Networks Inc.: Trial Decision: In this case, the Plaintiff was dismissed without cause by the Defendant and brought a summary judgment motion in his wrongful dismissal action. Paquette was employed for 14 years and 4 months, and earned an annual salary of $150,000.00. Andrew was able to get his client 17 months’ of pay in lieu of notice, damages of $163,267.90 for his salary as well as for lost benefits.
Allamby v. Burnbrae Farms Limited: Human Rights Decision: At the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario Andrew successfully argued to have a case which was struck for delay by a self-represented person added back on the hearing list.
Kurt v Idera Inc.: Divisional Appeal Court: In this case, Andrew successfully argued Divisional Court of Appeal regarding a constructive dismissal matter. On Appeal the Court found that the motion judged erred in law, and the matter was ordered back for a new summary judgment hearing.
Singh v. Qualified Metal Fabricators, Trial Decision (2016 CarswellOnt 8795, 267 A.C.W.S. (3d) 867). At trial Andrew successfully argued that the contract which attempted to limit the employee to minimum notice was invalid and got his client a month’s pay per year of service. Based on an internal survey of cases at least one quarter of all employment contracts are invalid based on the logic utilized in Singh.
Singh v. Qualified Metal Fabricators, Costs Decision (2016 CarswellOnt 8796, 267 A.C.W.S. (3d) 787). After a successful trial the judge awarded significant costs against the Defendant covering the Employee’s legal fees so that he was able to keep his entire severance.
Asgari v 975866 Ontario Ltd. Summary Judgment Monkhouse Law successfully argued that a summary judgment motion was appropriate where the employee was terminated with just cause. The Defendant relied on the company handbook to limit the reasonable notice period. However, Andrew won the argument that the handbook was not a contract of employment.
Zhang v. Totally Zing Inc., Enforcement of Settlement (2016 CarswellOnt 17956). The Defendant company settled but then denied there was a settlement and refused to pay. Andrew went to Court to enforce the settlement, resulting in the Court enforcing the settlement, plus legal fees for the enforcement.
Manase v Toronto District School Board, Cost Award, Prior to the commencement of a hearing in a wrongful dismissal matter involving a dispute on if the employee was an independent contractor or not, the Plaintiff accepted a settlement offer, plus costs to be assessed if not agreed by the parties. The costs were not agreed to and in this decision on the matter, Andrew successfully obtained his client costs in the amount of $40,000.00 to cover his client’s costs.
Weddell v. CondoFresh, This is a case where Andrew represented the employer and obtained successful results at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. Before the matter was heard, a civil claim for wrongful dismissal was also filed by the applicant. The Tribunal ordered that the hearing be deferred until the civil action was resolved due to overlap of facts and issues between the two proceedings.
Alexander v. Longo Brothers Fruit Market Inc. Andrew was successful at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario in resisting an application to strike the claim based on alleged duplication of proceedings.
Pavilion Sports Club Inc. v. Condor Security Inc.  O.J. No. 4148 [Quicklaw]. Andrew represented an company at trial on a claim for unpaid wages under a contract for services. Andrew successfully argued that the Plaintiff committed a fundamental breach of the employment agreement when it was negligent in providing security services which resulted in the theft of property and equipment belonging to the company.
Worked at Hicks Morley, Canada’s largest Employment and Labour Firm
Worked at Landy Marr Kats LLP, Litigation boutique
Worked at Government of Canada, Employment Equity Division
Worked at Government of Canada, Foreign Temporary Worker Division
Past President, Carleton Academic Student Government at Carleton University