Majority
no one having duties of a fiduciary character to discharge should be allowed to put his duties in conflict with his interest (Castonguay v. Sa Savoie ri Smith ne peut done 6tre accueilli dans sa demande de comTors dommages-intirits repr6sentant la perte d'un pr6tendu Rinfret J. b6n6fice acquis en contravention de ce principe.
C'est pourquoi nous sommes d'avis de confirmer avec d~pens les jugements qui ont debout6 l'appelant de son action.
Judgment of the Court
C.J.C.-The plaintiff's rights are governed by the terms of his contract of employment and we are, with respect, unable to find in those terms anything uncertain or equivocal. Termination of the contract at any time by notice is expressly made optional with the Association. Whether there existed good ground for the termination is quite irrelevant.
On such notice being duly given, the plaintiff's services forthwith came to an end. He was thereupon made accountable to the Association for all "monies, documents," etc., in his hands relating to its business and he thereafter ceased to act for the Association. His right to recover " remuneration for his services," i.e., commissions on new insurance and renewal premiums, is likewise expressly restricted by the words,
There is nothing ambiguous in this contract. Its plain terms must be given effect to regardless of any consideration of harshness or unfairness or of supposed intentions of S.C.R.