CCPartners | Blog

Date:
2014.10.23

Related Blogs by Category
Human Rights

Share:

Print:

THE EMPLOYERS' EDGE

Key Human Rights Decision Upheld by Divisional Court

Practice Areas: Human Rights

The Divisional Court recently upheld one of the most noteworthy Ontario Human Rights decisions of 2013 in which the Tribunal ordered the reinstatement (with back pay totalling $419,000) of an applicant whose employment had been terminated for almost a decade.  CCPartners blogged on the original decision here.

On appeal, the employer argued that reinstatement was a unique and uncommon remedy that the Tribunal had generally exercised in limited circumstances. The employer argued further that the tribunal ought not to have imposed “that remedy so long after the events giving rise to the complaint”.

The Court rejected the employer’s argument and agreed with the applicant’s submission that “the goal of the remedial provisions of the Code ought not to be thwarted because of the passage of time that was largely beyond the control” of the applicant. In this case, the delay in proceeding to a hearing was not caused by the applicant.

The Court held that the Tribunal has “broad remedial authority” and that, “while reinstatement is unusual, there is no barrier or obstacle to the remedy at law” and concluded that the Tribunal’s decision with respect to remedy was “intelligible, transparent and with justification. The outcome is within the range of reasonable expectation”.

In addition to upholding the Tribunal’s decision, the Court awarded an additional $15,000 in costs against the employer in respect of the judicial review process.

The important lessons for employers to take away from this decision are as follows:

  • While it is expected that reinstatement will continue to be uncommon at the HRTO, the possibility of reinstatement exists on any termination that is found to result from unlawful discrimination.
  • Since this decision makes clear that the passage of time will not necessarily diminish an employee's right to reinstatement, it may encourage the Tribunal to order reinstatement even when long periods of time have passed since the end of the employment relationship.
  • Employers should give serious consideration to the possibility of reinstatement after attempts at accommodation have failed. It is now more important than ever to ensure that reinstatement would constitute undue hardship before ending the employment relationship.

The School Board is currently seeking leave to appeal from the Court of Appeal for Ontario and CCPartners will keep you posted of any updates as they occur.

The lawyers at CCPartners can assist employers with the difficulties associated with accommodation under the Human Rights Code and with any Human Rights complaints they may be faced with.

Please Note: This blog has been prepared as an informational service for our clients and other interested parties. It is not intended to constitute legal advice, a complete statement of the law or opinion on any subject. Although we endeavour to ensure the accuracy of the content, no one should act upon the information provided without a thorough examination of the law after the facts of a specific situation are fully considered.

News

Menu

Crawford Chondon & Partners LLP is committed to providing an inclusive workplace that embraces and respects differences.  We support and promote the ongoing development, implementation and maintenance of best practices and strategies to enhance and improve equality, diversity and inclusion within the Firm, in advising clients and in the greater community. Click to learn more about our Diversity and Inclusion 

Main Office Map
24 Queen Street E.

Suite 500
Brampton, ON  L6V 1A3


P: 905.874.9343  TF: 1.877.874.9343
F: 905.874.1384  E: info@ccpartners.ca
Barrie Office  Map

132 Commerce Park Drive
Suite 253, Unit K
Barrie, ON L4N 0Z7


P: 705.719.2107 F: 1.866.525.8128

E: rboswell@ccpartners.ca 

Sudbury Office  Map

10 Elm Street
Suite 603
Sudbury Ontario P3C 5N3
 

P: 705.805.0174

E: info@ccpartners.ca 

Privacy | Accessibility | Disclaimer

© 2013 CRAWFORD CHONDON & PARTNERS LLP