Dr. Heimpel

The children's aid society brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order for extended society care with no access for a two-year-old child.

The parents, who both have developmental delays, opposed the motion and sought the return of the child with a supervision order.

The court found there was no genuine issue requiring a trial, as the parents lacked the capacity to parent independently and did not have adequate 24/7 supports in place.

The court granted summary judgment placing the child in extended society care, but ordered that the parents have access at the discretion of the society, finding that access was positive and in the child's best interests.

The applicant, a university counsellor, alleged that a colleague sexually harassed her by touching her buttocks at a conference social event, and that the university failed to adequately investigate her complaint.

She further alleged subsequent incidents of harassment and reprisal by the colleague in the workplace, and reprisal by the university.

The Tribunal found that the single incident of sexual harassment at the conference did occur, preferring the applicant's credible and consistent evidence over the respondent's account.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the allegations regarding the university's duty to investigate, finding its response reasonable.

The Tribunal also dismissed the allegations of subsequent harassment and reprisal by both the colleague and the university.

The personal respondent was ordered to pay $7,500 in general damages and $278 for medical expenses, with the university found not jointly liable as the colleague was not a directing mind.