What is the burden of proof on an employer who is pleading just cause for termination?

In the course of submissions, counsel for the plaintiff referred to authorities such as Elms v. Hywel Jones Architect Ltd., [1997] B.C.D. Civ. 315.90.50.30-02 on the issue as to the burden of proof on an employer who is pleading just cause for termination when that just cause may involve conduct approaching criminal in nature. It is clear that at this stage of the development in the law of Canada there are two burdens of proof: one in the criminal context of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the second, in the civil context of proof on a balance of probabilities, or sometimes expressed as proof by a preponderance of evidence. In my view, there is no intermediate burden of proof where an individual is claiming that the conduct of a dismissed employee amounts to a criminal offence. What is required, however, is clear, cogent and compelling evidence of the existence of the conduct complained of which allows the tribunal of fact to say with confidence that the employer's allegation has been established on a balance of probabilities or by a preponderance of evidence.