What is the test for a constructive dismissal?

The case at bar is much closer to Reber v. Lloyds Bank Int. Can., supra. The trial judge held there had been a demotion of the plaintiff when the employer transferred him from his position as manager of the Vancouver branch to the position of account executive in New York. That was held to be a constructive dismissal. This court allowed the appeal of the employer on the ground that the change in the plaintiff’s duties was a lateral transfer which did not breach a fundamental term of the employment contract. After referring to the decision in O’Grady, Mr. Justice Esson, giving the judgment of the majority, said at p. 372: In each case, it is a question of what are the terms of the contract, whether there has been a breach, and, if there has been a breach, whether it amounts to a fundamental breach. And at p. 373, he said: It is sometimes said that terms of employment cannot be varied except by mutual agreement and that any attempt by the employer to unilaterally impose a change is a breach going to the root of the contract. Even in cases of the O’Grady type, it would be necessary to examine any change amounting to a breach to determine whether it went to the root but, subject to that caveat, the proposition probably can be applied to such cases. It simply has no application to a case such as this.