and to also pay for the costs of her divorce. She testified that
Mr. McKenna was aware that she was working at Sobey’s but
never said anything about it.
 Ms. Brake also testified that because of her negative performance review in November of 2011, she lost her bonus and
did not get an increase in salary. In light of those losses, she told
Mr. McKenna in January of 2012 that she would look for a part-time job and he said “do whatever you want to do”. When a
friend approached Ms. Brake about working at Sobey’s, she took
the position because she believed her job with the appellant was
in jeopardy and she needed to have some money in the bank in
case she got fired.
 In light of Ms. Brake’s testimony, while one might quarrel
with exactly how the trial judge phrased the first sentence of
para. 4( v), I see no palpable and overriding error in it. The essential point to be taken from that sentence is that, while employed
by the appellant and to the appellant’s knowledge, Ms. Brake
supplemented her income by working part-time at Sobey’s.
Deductibility of the Sobey’s and Home Depot
 In my view, it was open to the trial judge to make no
deduction for the income that Ms. Brake earned from Sobey’s
and Home Depot during the balance of the notice period.
 In a wrongful dismissal action, an employer is generally
entitled to a deduction for income earned by the dismissed
employee from other sources during the common law notice
period. However, as Rand J. explained in Karas v. Rowlett,
 S.C.R. 1,  S.C.J. No. 46, at p. 8 S.C.R., for income
earned by the plaintiff after a breach of contract to be deductible
from damages, “the performance in mitigation and that provided
or contemplated under the original contract must be mutually
exclusive, and the mitigation, in that sense, is a substitute for
the other”. Therefore, if an employee has committed herself to
full-time employment with one employer, but her employment
contract permits for simultaneous employment with another
employer, and the first employer terminates her without notice,
any income from the second employer that she could have
earned while continuing with the first is not deductible from her
damages: see S.M. Waddams, The Law of Damages, looseleaf
(Rel. Nov. 2016), 2nd ed. (Toronto: Canada Law Book, 1991), at
 The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal applied this principle in McIntosh v. Saskatchewan Water Corp.,  S.J. No.
318, 26 C.C.E.L. 196 (C.A.).