When a technology company buys a smaller business to obtain the expertise of its founders, compensation can include restricted stock that vests over several years. That equity can become the largest part of what a departing executive loses. Whether it survives dismissal depends not only on the stock plan's wording, but on minimum employment standards.
Dr. Daniel Wigdor had built a technology consultancy later purchased by Meta. He became a Facebook Canada executive while keeping an academic appointment, and his compensation included substantial restricted stock units. His agreement purported to limit notice during the initial months of employment, while equity documents provided for vesting to stop upon termination. After he was dismissed in 2023, he challenged those terms.
In Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd., 2026 ONCA 572, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the conclusion that the termination clause was unenforceable because it failed to recognize service carried over through the business acquisition as Ontario law required. The court also found that the equity provisions violated the Employment Standards Act, 2000. By stopping vesting immediately, they purported to alter a term of employment during the statutory notice period, contrary to the Act's protections.
That breach made the equity forfeiture wording ineffective. The employee therefore recovered the value of stock that would have vested during the applicable common law reasonable notice period, not just the shorter statutory minimum. The Court added US$4,711,647.29 to the damages award. It left the refusal to award punitive damages undisturbed and dismissed the company's cross appeal.
This isn't a rule that every unvested share grant survives every departure. The outcome depended on the statutory floor, how the equity documents were incorporated into the employment relationship and what would have vested during notice. It illustrates, however, why a plan that is explicit about forfeiture can still fail if it overrides protections the parties aren't free to contract away.
For employers using share compensation, statutory compliance needs to be assessed at the moment the agreement is drafted, including when employees arrive through an acquisition. A term can create enormous financial exposure even where its meaning seems perfectly clear.
Source: Ontario Court of Appeal, Wigdor v. Facebook Canada Ltd., 2026 ONCA 572. Detailed independent appellate analysis: https://achkarlaw.com/cases/onca/lessons-from-wigdor-v-facebook-canada-ltd-2026/