Joan Mills v City of Hamilton, 2020 CanLII 62090 (ON PEHT) 2020-08-21 —The Applicant negotiated a settlement and signed a release with the previous employer, the Hamilton Entertainment and Conventions Facilities Inc (HECFI) resolving all matters related to her employment after she was terminated. The settlement required the Applicant to be paid a salary continuance, including any cost-of-living-adjustments (“COLA”). The Applicant became aware that she did not receive 1.9% of the COLA that she was entitled to. The Applicant argued that HECFI repudiated her contract by not paying this COLA, which relieves her of the release. Therefore, she filed a Statement of Claim alleging that her new employer, the City of Hamilton, is required to fulfil this pay equity obligation. The City of Hamilton argued that her position is included in HECFI’s pay equity plan and not the City of Hamilton’s. The Tribunal held that applicants must make an election between suing for damages and treating a settlement contract as repudiated and cannot elect both options. The Tribunal concluded that since HECFI paid 98.1% of the compensation guarantees by the settlement, the contract was not repudiated. Therefore, the Applicant was not relieved of the signed release and the City of Hamilton was not obligated to pay the Applicant.