2 total
Human rights application dismissed for delay; pursuing civil action first does not constitute good faith.
The applicant filed a human rights application alleging workplace harassment more than one year after the last alleged incident.
The applicant argued the delay was justified because she had first pursued a civil action in Small Claims Court, which was dismissed without prejudice to her right to file with the Tribunal.
The Tribunal found that pursuing other legal remedies before turning to the Tribunal does not amount to a good faith explanation for delay.
The application was dismissed for delay.
Court orders production of relevant employment and client files but upholds solicitor‑client privilege.
The plaintiff in a wrongful dismissal action brought a motion for further documentary production.
He sought documents relating to the termination of his former supervisor, an unredacted complaint file from the employer’s Office of the President, and mortgage files of other bank clients referenced during discovery.
The court held that documents relating to the supervisor’s termination were relevant because they could support the plaintiff’s allegation that the supervisor condoned the conduct relied upon for termination.
The court also ordered production of the additional mortgage files, finding they were likely to be relied upon by the defendant and therefore relevant and producible, with privacy concerns addressed by the deemed undertaking rule.
However, the request for an unredacted copy of the Office of the President file was denied after judicial review confirmed that the redacted portions were protected by solicitor‑client privilege.
