Law360 Canada ( June 23, 2021, 4:43 PM EDT) -- Appeal by the defendant law firm from trial judgment allowing the respondent’s wrongful dismissal claim against it. Cross-appeal by respondent from the dismissal of her claims for punitive damages and general damages for the loss of opportunity to become a lawyer. The respondent was hired as an articling student by the appellant. The firm specialized in driving law and offences. The respondent’s articles and employment were terminated after the appellant discovered a Blog that offered information of interest to persons facing a driving prohibition. Similar information was offered in the blogs maintained by the appellant. The appellant believed the Blog threatened the firm’s competitive position and that the respondent was behind it. The appellant then terminated the respondent’s employment and commenced an action against her for breach of contract, theft, trespass, and wrongful use of materials. The trial judge dismissed these claims. The trial judge found the allegations against the respondent did not constitute cause for dismissal or for the unilateral termination of the articling agreement. He awarded the respondent $18,034 in damages for breach of the employment contract and aggravated damages of $50,000. He did not deal with her claim for punitive damages. He found no evidence before him to value the potential increase in her earning capacity and declined to award damages based on the loss of the opportunity to become a lawyer, calling it speculative. The appellants argued the trial judge erred by not considering the special relationship between a principal and articled student mandated by the rules and requirements of the Law Society and thus wrongfully concluded that because the respondent’s conduct fell short of dishonesty, it did not breach the employment relationship or justify termination of her articles. The respondent argued the trial judge erred in not awarding damages for her delay in becoming a lawyer, despite his finding that the appellant’s allegations against her rendered her unemployable in the legal profession if the allegations remained outstanding. She further argued the trial judge erred by failing to award punitive damages....