For nearly three decades, Drago Krmpotic dedicated himself to the demanding world of television broadcasting, rising from maintenance worker to building supervisor. He was a trusted figure, a loyal employee, the backbone of the facility’s upkeep. Then, at 59, his career abruptly ended – just hours after he returned to work following major back surgery.
The timing felt brutal. Krmpotic’s surgery was, in part, a consequence of years of physical labor, injuries sustained while faithfully performing his duties. Offered sixteen months’ severance, he refused, believing he deserved more than a quick exit after so many years of service. He chose to fight, launching a legal battle for wrongful dismissal and further compensation.
The 2022 trial painted a clear picture of Krmpotic’s dedication. The judge described him as “loyal, responsible and trusted,” recognizing the physical toll his work had taken. The court awarded him 24 months of reasonable notice, acknowledging his age, long tenure, and the strenuous nature of his job. But the judgment didn’t stop there.
An additional $50,000 was awarded in aggravated damages, a recognition of the particularly harsh manner of his dismissal. The employer had offered no transparent explanation, fueling a sense of betrayal. When challenged, the company refused to provide financial records to support their stated reasons for the termination, raising serious questions about their motives.
The employers appealed, arguing Krmpotic hadn’t sufficiently tried to find new work and didn’t deserve the aggravated damages. They claimed he hadn’t done enough to mitigate his losses. However, the court of appeal sided with Krmpotic, acknowledging the limitations imposed by his recent surgery and his age. Testimony from his wife and son vividly illustrated his physical condition.
The appeal court firmly rejected the employer’s lack of transparency. The timing of the dismissal – immediately after his return from surgery – spoke volumes. The court found a clear breach of the employer’s duty of honesty and candour, a failure to be forthright about the true reasons behind the decision. A psychiatrist’s report wasn’t even needed to validate the distress caused by this bad faith conduct.
Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed. Krmpotic’s award of 24 months’ notice and $50,000 in aggravated damages stood firm. He was also awarded $12,000 to cover the costs of the appeal itself. This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of honesty and fairness in the workplace.
Employers must understand that a termination based on flimsy pretenses, especially when coupled with poor timing or a refusal to disclose supporting documentation, can lead to significant financial consequences. Aggravated damages aren’t contingent on a medical diagnosis; they arise from the manner of dismissal itself.
For employees, this case highlights the value of documented service and the recognition courts give to physically demanding roles. A long career and specialized skills can justify substantial notice periods. Furthermore, a good-faith effort to return to work, even if unsuccessful, can be crucial in demonstrating a commitment to mitigating losses. Candour and honesty during termination aren’t simply best practices – they are legally required.
