Giulia Ahmadi

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging that the respondent insurance carrier discriminated against him on the basis of disability by conspiring with his employer to sabotage his return to work.

The respondent brought a request for early dismissal under section 45.1 of the Human Rights Code, arguing the matter was already dealt with in a federal human rights complaint against the employer.

The Tribunal found that the federal proceeding, which included judicial review, had appropriately dealt with the substance of the application, specifically the proposed accommodation and return to work discussions.

The application was dismissed.

The corporate respondent brought a motion to strike portions of the pleadings filed by the Commission and the complainant.

The respondent argued that allegations relating to events after the date of the original complaint, allegations not raised in the original complaint, and allegations in the complainant's pleadings that contradicted or added to the Commission's pleadings should be struck.

The Tribunal dismissed the motion, finding that the impugned material facts formed part of the continuum of events of the complaint, and that the complainant has independent party status under the Code to file her own pleadings.

The appellant appealed a decision declining court jurisdiction over a dispute regarding long-term disability benefit entitlements.

The motions judge concluded that the essential character of the dispute arose from the interpretation, application, or administration of a collective agreement, meaning it must be resolved by arbitration.

The Court of Appeal agreed, noting that the long-term disability plan explicitly barred actions against the insurer and had to be read in conjunction with the collective agreement for unionized employees.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.