2 total
Motion to strike affidavits on judicial review dismissed, except for one expert affidavit improperly opining on domestic law.
The moving parties (respondents in a judicial review application) brought a motion to strike twelve affidavits filed by the responding parties.
The underlying application challenged a university tribunal's decision to suspend several tenured professors for workplace harassment.
The court struck the affidavit of an expert witness because it improperly opined on Ontario law.
However, the court declined to strike the remaining affidavits, finding that the evidence regarding the pre-hearing investigation, hearing process, and post-hearing impacts was relevant to the responding parties' procedural fairness arguments and should be assessed by the panel hearing the judicial review.
Human rights application challenging attendance management program dismissed for lack of standing and no reasonable prospect of success.
The applicant filed a human rights application challenging the attendance management program at two respondent work sites.
The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the applicant had standing against William Osler Health Centre and if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal found the applicant was employed solely by Carillion Services Inc. and lacked standing against William Osler.
Furthermore, the applicant's theoretical concerns about the attendance program, which had been revised following a union policy grievance settlement, did not raise issues under the Human Rights Code.
The application was dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.
