The lawsuit also asks the Ontario Superior Court to overturn legislation introduced by the government to roll back executive salaries at Hydro One, saying it violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

''We want (her) contract respected,'' said Clitheroe's lawyer, Alan Lenczner. ''We want them to honour their obligations to her, that is to pay her.''

Clitheroe's high-profile dismissal followed months of controversy over hefty pay packages and perks at Hydro One.

Clitheroe, 47, earned $2.2 million last year, which included an annual $174,000 for a new car and $172,000 for vacation allowance before she was fired last month.

Her employment contract also had a severance provision worth $6 million and an immediate annual pension of up to $1 million.

After intense opposition pressure, the government ordered directors at the company to slash their lucrative compensation packages.

Unsatisfied with the directors' response, the government ultimately tabled a bill to fire the board, scrap the severance and roll back to the executives' pay.

Eleven of the 12 directors resigned within hours of the bill's introduction and Clitheroe quit as a director a week later, although she stayed on as head of the corporation.

Then, last month, board chairman Glen Wright told a news conference that Clitheroe had been fired for cause over, among other things, renovations to her home using company resources and for abusing credit-card privileges.

Wright is named in the suit filed Wednesday.

''Glen Wright, in announcing the dismissal of the plaintiff as chief executive officer of the company for cause, made false and defamatory statements respecting the plaintiff,'' reads the statement of claim.

Lenczner said the government didn't comply with the legislation by negotiating a reduction in salary for Clitheroe.

''The legislation, if it applies, obliged the new directors to negotiate a substantial reduction in salary,'' he said. ''They didn't do that. They fired her. They didn't do what they were mandated by legislation to do.''

Even if the legislation does apply, it is contrary to the Charter, he said.

The statement of claim contains allegations that have not been proven in court.