Tribunal strikes proposed similar fact and expert evidence as irrelevant and unnecessary in discrimination complaint.
In an interim decision regarding a human rights complaint alleging racial discrimination in the denial of a university promotion, the Tribunal ruled on the admissibility of several proposed witness statements.
The Tribunal struck proposed similar fact evidence from other faculty members as irrelevant and lacking sufficient connection to the respondents.
The Tribunal also struck proposed expert evidence challenging a university equity report and assessing the applicant's promotion dossier, finding that such evidence was not necessary to assist the trier of fact.
Certain paragraphs of the applicant's own witness statement were struck for raising new allegations not included in the original complaint.
Ogunyankin v. Queen’s University, 2011 HRTO 111
