How do courts determine whether a matter arises out of a collective agreement?

Rounding this out, Justice Vancise in Hemmings v. University of Saskatchewan, supra, provides guidance as to how to determine whether a matter arises out of the collective agreement. According to Justice Vancise, it is simply necessary to consider the essential nature of the dispute. Vancise J., writes at para. 26: 26 As McLachlin J. stated in Weber, the task is to define the "essential character" of the dispute. It is not how the claim is pleaded, in this case in tort, that is determinative, but rather its essential character that will determine the appropriate forum. Here, the essential nature of the dispute is a failure to comply with the obligations under the collective agreement ...

Accordingly, I find that the essential character of this dispute as set out in the claim and plead in the fashion it has been: is an allegation that there was a failure to comply with the obligations under the collective bargaining agreement. (See also Maurice v. Health Sciences, supra, where Justice Allbright provides a similar test modified regarding disputes against a union by a union member.)