The Small Claims Court in British Columbia considered two cases where employers attempted to sue workers who allegedly resigned without giving the required notice under their contracts.

The decisions in both cases were published online on Monday – and while the circumstances differed, the court dismissed the employers' claims in both instances for the same reason.

The decisions explained that resignation without the required notice can legally constitute a "breach of contract," entitling the employer to file a claim for damages, but – and this was found to be the determining factor in each case – there must be evidence that the worker's departure caused the claimed damages.

In the first case, the John Fleming Insurance Agency requested the court to compensate the company $3,000 after broker Davik Mehta resigned without notice in 2022.

Justice Christopher C. Rivers said in his decision that whether Mehta breached the contract was ultimately irrelevant because the company failed to prove its case.

The decision states, "Damages resulting from a breach of contract are generally intended to put the innocent party in the same position as if the contract had been performed as agreed."

The company did not provide "any evidence or submissions" on how it arrived at the $3,000 amount – which Rivers said might have included things like "revenue records" brought in by the employee or evidence "from clients who chose not to deal with (the company) due to Mr. Mehta’s sudden departure."

In the second case, a company named 548981 Limited was claiming $2,400 in damages after Wendy Reese left her job giving two weeks' notice instead of the required three.

The company said this amount equaled Reese's salary for three weeks, but – again – the court found the claimed amount unsubstantiated and therefore no damages could be awarded.

Justice Sarah Orr stated in her decision: "The employer provided no evidence of any losses suffered because the employee failed to provide three weeks’ notice."

Moreover, in this case, the court found there was evidence that the company accepted Reese’s resignation, meaning it "accepted the employee’s breach of contract."