The Ontario Superior Court has sentenced the director of Vox Construction to 21 days in jail for contempt after repeatedly refusing to attend court-ordered examinations related to unpaid wages and benefits owed to union members.
The court also ordered the director to pay $15,750 in costs to the Labourers’ International Union of North America, Local 183, which brought the motion.
Union award left unpaid
Vox Construction, a paving and concrete company, employed several members of the union under a collective agreement with the Toronto and Area Road Builders’ Association. The agreement required Vox to remit wages and benefits to the union. While the employees performed the work, the company failed to pay them.
In December 2023, an arbitrator ordered Vox to pay $50,587.38 to the union. Vox did not attend that hearing, and the award was later entered as a court order in May 2024. To date, only $263.55 has been collected through garnishment.
The company’s sole director also controls affiliated firms Euro-Royal Paving, West Star Restorations, Westar Restorations and P.D.F. Homes.
Failure to attend examinations
To enforce the award, the union scheduled multiple examinations in aid of execution beginning in June 2024. Despite personal service attempts, mailed notices, and emails to Vox’s corporate addresses and its bookkeeper, the director failed to appear.
At one point, the bookkeeper acknowledged receiving the notices and relayed that the company intended to pay once it had its “account open.” Subsequent communications stopped, and the director never attended.
In February 2025, the court issued an order compelling attendance at an examination on March 4, 2025, and required the payment of $5,500 in costs. The order permitted service by email to Vox and the bookkeeper. The director did not attend.
Contempt finding
The union then moved for contempt. In July 2025, the director was personally served at his home but did not appear for the liability phase of the contempt hearing.
The court found him in contempt, citing the clear terms of the March 4 order, his actual knowledge of it, and his intentional failure to attend. Costs of $8,042.97 were awarded to the union.
Despite being given opportunities to purge the contempt by attending further examinations in August and September 2025, the director did not comply. Notices left at his home disappeared, and emails to Vox began to bounce. The union attempted service through mail, courier and even Facebook, without success.
Jail term imposed
At the penalty phase, which the director did not attend, the union requested a 21-day sentence. The court ruled that neither suspended sentences nor fines would be effective, given the director’s consistent refusal to comply.
“Incarceration is the only reasonable and proportionate option,” the court wrote, noting there were no mitigating or aggravating factors but emphasizing the seriousness of failing to pay workers’ wages and benefits.
The judge compared the case to prior sentencing ranges for contempt of an examination in aid of execution, which have ranged from 10 to 90 days. The 21-day term was deemed appropriate to denounce the conduct and encourage compliance.
The court signed a warrant of arrest and stated that if the director complies with the outstanding examination order and pays $13,542.97 in costs before completing his sentence, he may apply for a reduction.
Additional costs awarded
On top of the jail term, the court fixed costs of $15,750 payable to the union by October 31, 2025. These covered disbursements for repeated service attempts and expenses from aborted examinations.
The court directed that the endorsement be delivered to the director through multiple channels, including email, mail, Facebook and personal service.
“(He) hired workers. They did the work. He didn’t pay them,” the court concluded. “He may have an explanation or justification for his failure to do so. But since then, he has flouted the rule of law. He didn’t defend the arbitration. He didn’t pay the award. He ignored the Union’s repeated summons. He didn’t defend his failure to do so before Justice McSweeney. He ignored repeated attempts by the Union and this court to coax his cooperation. He didn’t defend himself at the contempt hearing.”
For more information, see Labourers’ International Union of North America, Loc 183 v Vox Construction Inc., 2025 ONSC 5531 (CanLII).
