Every client faces its own unique circumstances. Ruth works with her clients to understand their perspective, and tailors her advice to be responsive to their needs. Clients need to understand how the law impacts them and their operations from all angles, and Ruth aims to give real-world guidance to help each client make the choices that are right for them.
Some examples of Ruth’s regular work includes:
- Structuring successful hiring and terminations, and helping clients navigate claims from former employees;
- Conducting hearings and appeals before administrative tribunals and at all levels of Court in the province;
- Advising statutory and regulatory bodies on a variety of administrative law issues; and
- Working with employers in all aspects of the employment relationship, including discrimination and accommodation, union-management relations, and workers’ compensation.
- Representing a health authority before the Court of Appeal in a contractual dispute (hearing in April 2021, judgment pending)
- Representing a regulator in contested professional disciplinary proceedings (recent decisions include Mirolo v College of Physicians and Surgeons of NL, 2019 NLCPS 1; Drover v College of Physicians and Surgeons of NL, 2019 NLCPS 2)
- Successful defence of a professional regulator before the Supreme Court, General Division against a statutory appeal from a complainant (Quinlan v College of Physicians and Surgeons of NL, 2019 NLSC 27)
- Argued a statutory appeal on behalf of the regulator from a disciplinary finding against a physician (Mirolo v College of Physicians and Surgeons of NL, 2021 NLSC 12)
- Successfully defended a client’s security interest from a challenge by a subsequent creditor before the Court of Appeal (Coleman Management Services Limited v MMH Prestige Homes, 2019 NLCA 45)
- Represented a regulatory body in respect of an application seeking an order for mandamus (Sequence Bioinformatics v Health Research Ethics Authority for NL, 2018 NLSC 129)
- Successful at summary trial and before the Court of Appeal in defending a challenge to an engineering consulting firm’s standard retainer agreement language (Community Mental Health Initiative v Summit Lounge Ltd. et al, 2014 NLTD(G) 130 and 2018 NLCA 42)
- Represented a vehicle dealership as employer in a union grievance in respect of layoff and recall practices (2021, decision is unreported)