Norsemont loses former VP's wrongful dismissal case
2013-02-04 13:47 ET - Street Wire
Not available.
© 2026 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated,
although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted.
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the
University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.
I have met Levy in the past. I wouldn't touch any of his deals with a 10 foot pole. The judge seems to have described Levy quite accurately.
Posted by investor1 at 2013-02-04 14:42
Lawsuits = No winners.
Posted by Sad Footnote at 2013-02-04 14:47
Mr Kelly got the sympathies of the court with his wasting precious BC taxepayers time. He didn't do his job and was incapable, end of story. Blaming others for your failure is a sign of a pathetic person.
Posted by Investor at 2013-02-04 14:50
Good on Mr.Kelly! And a fine article Mr. Caswell. If that behavior by Mr. Levy isn't bullying, than I don't know what is.
We preach to our kids not to be bullied and to call them out - so should adults, especially in the work place.
Posted by Du-rag at 2013-02-04 14:58
This is Marc E. Levy? I will log that name for the future. He sounds like a loutish thug and a bully.
Posted by Phat Dean at 2013-02-04 15:56
Have you ever met this guy Levy -- definition of nerd, dweeb and geek mixed into one. Must have been bullied alot when he was a kid. Now lashing back/out (?).
Posted by JudgeDread at 2013-02-04 17:56
I wouldn't invest in any deal Levy is associated with. Have to agree with the dweeb comment - actually kinda the male version of Popeye's gal friend Olive Oyl.
Posted by Invest Wise at 2013-02-04 19:50
I do not know who this James Kelly is but he evidently has his supporters. Levy's name is everywhere and none of the comments of the positive variety. I too will mark him as 'no go'.
Posted by Da Crusader at 2013-02-05 10:42
Congratulations Mr Kelly for being the pathetic guy who couldn't raise any significant money if your life depended on it. You wasted 6-7 years of everyone's time inlcuding your own for $100k. Not sure how strong your math skills are but I believe over that time, Mcdonalds pays a hell of a lot more by the way.
Posted by Broker of Olive Oyl at 2013-02-05 12:12
Hey "broker of Olive Oly" read the judgement. Your boy LOST.
Posted by Du-rag at 2013-02-05 12:28
Someone is actually defending Levy?? Let me get this straight. Mr. Kelly decides to defend *himself* (always a questionable move) and goes up against Levy and his lawyer - and loses! I agree with the word 'pathetic'...but hang the sign where it belongs - around the neck of the failed Levy.
Posted by Phatter Dean at 2013-02-05 15:02
@Phatter Dean
"Mr. Kelly decides to defend *himself* (always a questionable move) and goes up against Levy and his lawyer - and loses".
Actually...it seems that Mr. Kelly won.
While $110,000 might not seem like much, it only took 33 days of his time in court, which works out to $3,333.33 per day, which is a pretty good per diem, right?
Adding icing to the cake is the fact that $100,000 of the award ($3,030.00 per day) is for non-taxable punitive damages.
And, gilding the lily (as it were), the Honourable Madame Justice L.A.Fenion awarded Mr. Kelly his costs at Scale B. Presuming $110.00 per unit and guessing at five units per day, that could be another $16,500 to add to the Kelly kitty.
During that 33 days of trial, one wonders if Marc Levy (SW shows him to be an ex-director of NOM since June 1, 2007)was donating his time for free.
What might make this an exceptionally pyrrhic exercise in employee relations would be if NOM and its successor refuse to indemnify Mr.Levy, Mr. DeMelt and other named individuals and goes after them for the award. Coutts Pulver, a well-respected firm which seems to specialize in labour relations and labour law, represented NOM, but might their fees also be tacked on as a recoverable item?
I'm fairly sure that Mr. Kelly would have made post-2006/2007 directors aware of the impending lawsuit prior to the first court date (March 7, 2011), so they would have had lots of time to get their ducks lined up.
The ruling is here:
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/13/01/2013BCSC0147.htm
Posted by harpinder at 2013-02-05 20:21
I would seem that Levy the Lout has a few fans here. Amazing! When his name comes up on the street, the coffee bars and the liquor bars - can't seem to find anyone who is on his side. I would imagine any company that would bring him on board has a death wish?
Posted by Da Crusader at 2013-02-06 14:43
Marc Levy is a loser...and he lost this lawsuit too.
Posted by redniprah at 2013-02-06 23:38
Mr. Levy appears to have made 2 of the posts above. lol
Posted by shoes at 2013-02-08 12:53
Hey shoes, I wouldn't be surprised if the Levster did just that.
Posted by Jim at 2013-02-08 21:21
Mr. Kelly was going for much more but only got $ 5,000 for termination.
The rest was for punitive damages which were all a result of Mr. Levy's actions it would seem. This cost Kelly 9 years of his life he will never get back.
$ 100,000 to Levy for stupidity and $ 5,000 to Hudbay/Norsmeont. Peanuts for 9 years int he wilderness without job opportunities.
Mr. Kelly was a VP of Finance and could have just done what Mr. Levy wanted and he would have a job today perhaps in one of the many Mr. Levy companies and 100,000 (at least) options that would have made him (assuming they were .30 given the $ 30,000 comment in the story) about $ 300,000 by the end of 2005 AFTER TAX.
Mr. Kelly lost big time. Mr. Levy lost big time. Lawyers win.
And that is the Bottomline.
Posted by Bottomline at 2013-02-11 01:49
And when it comes to reputation on the street? Marc E. Levey lost HUGE!
Posted by Da Crusader at 2013-02-11 07:42
"Mr. Kelly lost big time. Mr. Levy lost big time. Lawyers win."
If you had read to the Bottomline, that is what was stated as the Bottomline.
Posted by Bottomline at 2013-02-11 11:10
Comments for this item are closed