How have the courts interpreted the concept of conspiracy in a claim of wrongful dismissal?

In Napoleone v. Baraldi, 2004 BCSC 1065, Pitfield J. of the British Columbia Supreme Court was dealing with a claim of wrongful dismissal, where the plaintiff pled, in the alternative, the tort of conspiracy to cause financial harm to him. At para. 9, he said as follows: “In my opinion, it is ‘plain and obvious’ that the tort of conspiracy alleged in general terms against [the defendants] in relation to wrongful dismissal cannot succeed. Any decision to dismiss a company’s employee must be made by those responsible for the operations of the company. At no point does the plaintiff plead that [the defendants] were acting beyond the scope of their authority in making the decision to dismiss him. …” (emphasis added) Later, at para. 11, Pitfield J. applied the concept of merger and said: “… The harm that results from the decision or agreement of corporate officers or directors to dismiss is reflected in the loss of employment that gives rise to a cause of action for breach of contract. No facts are pleaded in support of any independent harm flowing from the wrongful dismissal that would give credence to a claim in conspiracy. In the circumstances, all of the allegations of conspiracy are merged in the claim of wrongful dismissal.” (emphasis added)