The federal government has amended the pension fund investment
rules under Schedule III to the Pension Benefits Standards
Regulations, 1985. The change came into effect on July 1,
According to the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement,
modernization of the investment rules is part of the federal
government's measures to strengthen and improve the legislative
and regulatory framework for federally regulated private pension
plans on a permanent basis. The change aims at providing more
flexibility for plans to choose the investment options that best
suit their investment needs and adopting flexibile, prudent and
effective principles-based investment rules.
Removal of Quantitative Limits on Resource and Real Property
Prior to the amendment, the investment of the pension fund of a
federally regulated private pension plan in real property and
Canadian resource properties was subject to 5%, 15% and 25%
quantitative investment limits. These quantitative limits are now
The removal of these quantitative limits is a welcome change for
the modernization of the pension fund investment rules. The impact
statement indicates that there will be more changes to the
investment rules but it is unlikely that all of the current
quantitative investment limits (e.g., the prohibition on a pension
fund holding more than 30% of the voting shares of a single entity)
will be removed.
This change to the federal investment rules will not only affect
federally regulated private pension plans; it will also affect
pension plans governed by the provincial pension legislation which
has adopted the federal investment rules, as amended from time to
time. These jurisdictions are Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba
The changes will not affect pension plans governed by the New
Brunswick and Quebec pension legislation (as they have different
investment rules) or pension plans governed by the Ontario, Nova
Scotia or Newfoundland and Labrador pension legislation, without
conforming changes to their investment rules.
As a note of caution, even for pension plans in the
jurisdictions affected by the change, the investment of pension
funds may still be subject to the 5%/10%/25% limits if these limits
are included in the pension plan's statement of investment
policies and procedures and are not removed.
In a ruling by the Quebec Court of Appeal in September 2013, one of the issues before the Court was whether an employee could be awarded non-monetary damages on account of alleged wrongful conduct by the employer when it did not renew her contract of employment.
In Lovely v. Prestige Travel Ltd., 2013 ABQB 467, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench ordered an employer to pay an executive level employee one year’s base salary, after it terminated his employment one year into a two-year, fixed term employment contract.
After a winding ride through our court system the case of Pate v. Galway-Cavendish has most recently received attention from our Court of Appeal which has awarded $450,000.00 for punitive damages to the dismissed employee’s estate.
Managing employees who are on a leave of absence is often a difficult task for employers. Among other things, employers must understand the contractual, statutory and common law obligations which are owed to such employees, particularly with respect to the protection and continuation of benefits.
It is no surprise that emotions can run high during a workplace investigation. Whether the complaint concerns harassment, theft or other alleged misconduct, there is often a tendency for parties to vigorously try to advance their version of events.