Timmins v. Artisan Cells: Employer Adds conditions to Severance Payments

In the recent decision of Timmins v. Artisan Cells, 2025 CanLII 2387, the Ontario Superior Court ruled that Artisan Development Labs Inc. and its subsidiary, Artisan Cell Labs Inc. (collectively “Artisan” or the “Company“), repudiated the employment agreement of a senior executive by refusing to pay his contractual severance and demanding a broad release in exchange for additional compensation. As a result, the Court awarded the executive, Dr. Nicholas Timmins, nine months’ notice under common law, totalling $456,908.82.

Dr. Timmins was the Chief Development Officer, overseeing the Company’s Canadian operations. Dr. Timmins’ employment agreement guaranteed him the greater of three months’ pay or his minimum entitlements under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. However, when Artisan’s leadership terminated his employment without cause in March 2023, the Company provided him with only one week’s termination pay – less than his contractual and statutory entitlements. The Company refused to pay the remaining severance unless Dr. Timmins signed a full and final release that included non-disclosure and non-disparagement clauses.

The Court found that the Company withheld Dr. Timmins’ severance entitlements to pressure him into signing the release. Justice Callaghan concluded that the Company did not intend to be bound by the employment agreement, and the Company thereby repudiated Dr. Timmins’ agreement. As a result, the Court ruled that the termination clause in Dr. Timmins’ employment agreement was unenforceable, and he was entitled to common law reasonable notice.

In determining the appropriate notice period, the Court considered Dr. Timmins’ age (44), tenure (3.5 years), seniority, and the limited availability of comparable roles in the highly specialized gene therapy sector. The Court awarded nine months’ compensation in lieu of notice, which included base salary, RRSP contributions, benefits, phone reimbursement, and a pro-rated annual bonus.

This decision serves as a reminder that an employer should not impose new conditions on severance payments that were otherwise guaranteed in an employment agreement. If employers do so, they risk losing the protection of the employment agreement and facing significantly greater severance liabilities under common law.

To read the full decision, click here: https://canlii.ca/t/k90cf