Donich Law - Jordan Donich - Courtroom Sketch

Our Experience

Stealing from one’s employer is a very serious matter which can result in severe consequences for those who are caught and convicted. Those who are caught stealing from their place of employment will almost certainly be terminated. In addition, their employer may report them to the police and to the relevant professional regulatory body if the employee was a regulated professional. Theft from one’s employer is seen as particularly aggravating due to the position of trust employees hold. Click here for more information on the punishments for stealing from work.

In 2021, the Firm successfully defended an individual charged with theft over $5,000 and falsifying employee records in R. v. K.S. [2021]. The accused was charged after allegedly committing time theft by falsifying time records for close to $15,000.00. Police traced the IP address used to make changes to the time records and linked it to the accused. The case was further complicated by the fact that the accused was in the process of becoming a Canadian citizen. The Firm was ultimately able to secure a withdrawal of the charges after presenting evidence that the accused had in fact been completing work from home and by raising concerns with evidence presented by another staff member with a previous conviction for fraud.

The Firm has extensive experience defending employees charged with sophisticated internal financial crimes. In the Firm’s R. v. E.K. [2020], it secured a withdrawal of a $30,000.00 internal theft related to merchandise being allegedly stolen from a factory. The scheme was conducted by a manager and junior employee, including the family members of staff who were allegedly helping move the product. In 2018, the Firm stayed nine (9) charges of money laundering foreign proceeds of crime from the United States in an estimated $1,000,000.00 internal Gold Bullion fraud. Cash was allegedly being stolen from senior citizens and converted to Gold in its R. v. Z.U. [2018].

In the Firm’s S. G. [2020], it resolved a $53,423.00 USD internal fraud allegation from Roots Canada without a criminal record. The employee was allegedly creating forged documents to divert company money to fake companies. In July 2017, the Firm resolved an $18,500.00 cash theft from a CIBC bank employee on the job without a record, in its R. v. D.D. [2017]. In April, 2019, the Firm resolved a $170,000.00 combined civil and criminal internal employee fraud allegation without a criminal record in its R. v. O.I. [2019]. The employee was allegedly refunding false transactions to credit cards.

The Firm has also increasingly represented concerned employees during an internal theft investigation. Employees have contacted the Firm where they suspect they will soon be investigated to best prepare themselves and safeguard their legal interests. Unlike law enforcement, an employee actually has much less legal protection and rights with an internal loss prevention investigator. Anything said to corporate security will be documented and ultimately provided to police, should criminal charges be pursued. If an employee makes self-incriminating statements, signs any admissions or provide any evidence to their employer, it significantly decreases the ability of the defence lawyer to later combat criminal charges. Resigning, attempting to “get ahead” of things or running away also have negative implications because an adverse inference may be drawn.

Punishments for Theft Depend on the Value of Property

Donich Law - Assault Punishments

In the Firm’s File No. 38****2, it discreetly defended an employee in 2020 under investigation for missing company property close to $10,000 in value. The Firm did not reveal itself to the employer and was able to guide the employee through the internal investigation with international corporate security without any criminal charges, including saving their employment. We were able to strategically help the employee answer appropriate questions while shielding them from potential liability associated with the investigation.

In the Firm’s File No. 28****2 it assisted an employee at the Rogers Centre with an internal theft investigation related to missing merchandise. The company was conducting an audit and reviewing video surveillance. The employee was not arrested and maintained his employment. The Firm had to prepare the employee for a workplace investigation related to the stolen merchandise. The employer was unaware the Firm was providing legal advice to the employee which can often be a powerful strategic choice. Companies can sometimes draw an adverse inference where the employee has counsel.

In the Firm’s File No. 58****1 it discreetly assisted a long standing employee related to a complex kick back scheme. The employee was interviewed multiple times, the company attempted to seize property and the investigation was ultimately resolved without any criminal charges. The Firm was able to protect the accused’s privacy interest in his personal property which was being sought by forensic accountants for analysis. By protecting the rights of the employee, the Firm was able to avoid potential criminal and civil liability. The employer did not care about any privacy interest in the data stored in electronic devices. By protecting those interests, the Firm was able to protect the employee.

How to Defend Theft Under $5000

In February 2021, the Firm defended a Canada Post employee alleged to have defrauded Sun Life $8000.00 in its Case No. 03****2. The matter was referred to Ottawa Police by Sun Life and the accused contacted for investigation. The Firm prepared the employee for interrogation over on three separate occasions. The Firm was able to challenge the alleged false claims and ultimately saved the accused’s employment after negotiations with national legal counsel, including avoiding criminal charges.

In 2021, the Firm defended a retail manger under investigation for an internal theft of company property in its File No. 52****9. The employee contacted the Firm immediately and prior to meeting with their employer. The Firm worked behind the employee anonymously during the investigation where the matter was ultimately resolved without reporting to law enforcement or any factual finding of internal theft. When an employee is being investigated early, they are vulnerable and will often be cornered by their employer into making an admission.  While there is no specific criminal offence for stealing from one’s employer, there are several different offences that an individual may be charged with. The breach of trust associated with workplace theft will also be an aggravating factor at sentencing.

Law Newbie is a free AI research assistant that can help you safely answer questions about criminal law.

Learn More

Frequently Asked Questions

What will Happen if I Steal from my Employer?

When an employer receives information that one of their employees may be stealing, they will launch an investigation where necessary. This investigation may be carried out by an internal employee or may be outsourced to private firm. An investigation may include reviewing surveillance footage, looking into computer logs and other electronic paper trails, interviewing witnesses including the accused individual, and collecting any other relevant evidence to prove the accused’s guilt.

Should the employer gather evidence to prove the accused is guilty the accused is likely to be terminated as a result. In some cases, the employer may also report the matter to law enforcement. Whether or not this occurs will depend on company policies.

It is important to remember that any information divulged, or statements provided during an employment investigation may be provided to police should charges be laid. If, for example, the accused employee makes admissions of guilt to their employer during the employment investigation, this information may be provided to the police and used to prosecute the accused. In a criminal case, an accused can never be compelled to speak and self-incriminate. By providing information during an employment investigation an accused is effectively overstepping this right should they be criminally charged.

What are my Rights in an Employment Investigation into Theft?

It is important to understand your rights prior to participating in an employment investigation. As noted above, when criminal charges are laid, an accused has certain rights pursuant to the Charter. These rights include the right to silence and the right not to self-incriminate. This means that the police cannot compel an accused person to provide a statement.

In an employment context however, no such right exists. An employer may require their employees to actively participate in employment investigations. An employee who fails to do so may be penalized or even terminated as a result. This places an employee who has committed theft in a precarious position. If they refuse to provide a statement they may be terminated but if they do provide a statement, it could be used against them in court.

An employee in this situation is encouraged to seek legal counsel as soon as possible. Legal counsel can assist you in navigating both the employment investigation and any subsequent criminal investigation to ensure your rights are protected.

What is Time Theft?

Time theft occurs when an employee is paid for hours they did not work. Time theft can occur in many different scenarios. For example, an employee who clocks into work early or late without working extra hours has committed time theft. Similarly, an employee who fails to work the number of hours they are paid for has also committed time theft. In situations where the employee has taken steps to commit time theft and uses deceit or lies to cover their tracks may be charged with the more serious offence of fraud.

Time theft is considered to have the same, if not more moral blameworthiness than thefts occurring in other contexts. This is because there is a level of trust between an employee and employer. An employee who abuses that trust to steal from their company may be sentenced more harshly if convicted.

How to Defend a Theft from Work Charge?

The best defence for any theft from work case will depend largely on the facts of the case and the way in which the employer’s investigation has unfolded. To fire an individual for theft the employer must have clear proof.

If you have been accused, it is important to gather as much information as possible and to avoid making statements of any kind prior to speaking with legal counsel. An individual who has been accused of theft from work can best answer to the allegations when they have all the details. Employers can be reluctant to divulge details of the investigation which can be make providing a defence more difficult.

Employees are encouraged to ask for details regarding the alleged theft. If the employer has proof, the employee will benefit from seeing it. The more information the employee has, the better they can defend themselves. Employees are also encouraged to document everything. This can assist in defending criminal charges should they be laid and could also assist with a wrongful dismissal lawsuit should the employer be unable to adequately prove the employee is guilty of theft.

What will Happen if I am Convicted of Theft from Work?

An individual convicted of stealing from their employer will face a number of serious consequences. In addition to the penalties associated with the criminal conviction including jail time, fines, restitution, and/or probation, an offender will also face other negative consequences.

An individual with a criminal record for theft may have difficulty attaining and maintaining gainful employment. Virtually all employers require a criminal background check prior to hiring a new employee. Having theft on one’s record is likely to raise questions. An employer who discovers that a potential employee has stolen from their last job is unlikely to hire that employee.

An individual with a criminal record may also face difficulty traveling outside of Canada. The United States in particular can be strict about who they allow in their country, with border agents regularly refusing entry to those with a criminal history. This can include even minor offences like theft. While not automatically grounds to inadmissibility, having theft on one’s criminal record can make travel to the U.S. more difficult.

Donich Law - In the News
Donich Law - In the News - Media Logos

Breakfast Television

Mental Health Concerns in the Justice System.

CP24

The Difference between Criminal and Civil Liability.

CTV News National

The Rise of Gun Violence in Toronto.

Global News

New Changes to Pardons in Canada.

Punishments for Stealing From Work

R. v. J.W., 2025 ONCA 746

In the 2025 case of R. v. J.W., the offender appealed his sentence after stealing a culturally significant portrait of Winston Churchill from a hotel in Ottawa, replacing it with a fake, and then selling the original. The offender subsequently pled guilty to theft over $5,000, forgery, and possession of stolen property over $5,000 for the purposes of trafficking. At sentencing, the court imposed a sentence of two years less a day in custody, citing the damage the offender had caused to the original portrait while transporting it and the level of sophistication and planning that went into executing the crimes. The offender appealed the sentence. The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the sentence.

R. v. M.S., 2025 ONSC 2062

In the 2025 case of R. v. M.S., the offender was convicted of two counts of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice. The offender was a former investment banker who used his position of trust with his clients to steal from them. The offender was found to have taken $150,000 from one client and $75,000 from another. Instead of investing the money, the offender simply kept it.  In determining the appropriate sentence, the Court noted the impact on the victims as well as the collateral consequences to the offender. The offender would likely never work in his chosen field again and had lost his home as a result of the proceedings. The offender was sentenced to one day imprisonment and two years’ probation. The offender was also ordered to pay restitution to both victims for the full amount taken.

R. v. D.L., 2026 ONCJ 86

In the 2026 case of R. v. D.L., the offender pled guilty to one count of fraud over $5,000. The offender, an accountant at the business he worked for, was provided with pre-signed cheques in anticipation of another accountant leaving the firm. The offender took the pre-signed cheques and issued himself 15 unearned pay cheques totaling more than $30,000. The offender did the same thing for another employee at the firm with the total loss reaching more than $50,000.  In coming to a sentence, the Court noted substance abuse issues in the offender’s life as well as a prior criminal record for similar offences. The offender was sentenced to six months house arrest.

About the Author

Jordan Donich Profile Photo

Jordan Donich

Jordan Donich has been a Lawyer for over 10 years and is a trusted legal analyst by Canadian Media. He is as a leader in Canada’s tech sector for lawyers and developer of Law Newbie. Jordan is a Black Belt with the Japan Karate Association and trained in Krav Maga. He won a Gold Medal at 2004 Canadian National Championships and was published in the National Newspaper Awards.

Jordan has been featured in Forbes, Canadian Lawyer and is a member of DMZ Angels in Toronto.