HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Jeff St. Denis
Applicant
-and-
Flowserve Canada Corp.
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Alison Renton
Indexed as: St. Denis v. Flowserve Canada
INTRODUCTION
1This is an Application filed on November 19, 2009 under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19, as amended (the “Code”). The applicant worked for the respondent from July 24, 2006 until September 14, 2009 when his employment was terminated following an approximate 9 month absence for medical reasons. He alleges that he was subjected to discrimination on the basis of disability in employment.
2The respondent filed a partial Response requesting an early dismissal of the Application on the basis that the applicant accepted a termination compensation package offered by the respondent and signed a full and final release on September 14, 2009 (“the release”).
3The Tribunal sent a Notice of Request to Dismiss (“the Notice”) to the applicant and his counsel dated February 22, 2010 advising that the respondent was seeking to have the Application dismissed on the basis of the release. The Tribunal invited the applicant to file a response to the Notice. The applicant did not respond and the time for doing so has now passed.
4On March 16, 2010 the Tribunal wrote to the parties confirming that the applicant had not filed a response to the Notice. The parties were directed to advise the Tribunal within one week of the date of the letter if either party wished to have an opportunity to make oral submissions, failing which the Tribunal would consider the Request to Dismiss on the basis of written material before it. Neither party responded to the Tribunal’s March 16, 2010 correspondence.
5For the reasons set out below, the Application is dismissed.
THE RELEASE
6The release contains the following provisions:
For the consideration described in the letter dated September 14, 2009 from Guy Parker to Jeff St. Denis the sufficiency of all of which is hereby acknowledged, Jeff St. Denis (hereinafter referred to as the “Releasor”), DOES HEREBY RELEASE Indemnity does for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, release and forever discharge Flowserve Canada Corp. and its affiliates, divisions, subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, assigns, agents, servants, employees, officers and directors, (hereinafter referred to as the “Releasees”) of and from any and all claims, demands, actions, causes of action of every kind, known or unknown, howsoever arising, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, all claims arising out of or in any way related to the employment of the Releasor with Flowserve Canada Corp. or the other Releasees, or the termination, resignation, retirement or cessation of such employment.
Without limitation, this Release and Indemnity covers all claims for wrongful dismissal or breach of contract or claims arising under or in connection with the Labour Relations Act, the Employment Standards Act, the Human Rights Code, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, and claims for mental or physical disability or sickness or for insurance benefits, and including all loss or damage not now known or anticipated but which may arise in the future, and all consequences thereof.
AND FOR THE SAID CONSIDERATION the Releasor further agrees:….
(c) that by entering into this Release and Indemnity, the Releasor confirms that he has had the opportunity to obtain independent legal advice and rely upon that advice and that the terms of the Release and Indemnity are fully understood and voluntarily AND FOREVER DISCHARGE, and by signing this Release and accepted by him….
(f) the Releasor agrees that he has discussed or otherwise canvassed any and all human rights complaints, concerns or issues, arising out of or in respect to his employment with Flowserve Canada Corp., or the other Releasees, and, for greater clarity to the other provisions contained in this Release and Indemnity, the Releasor agrees that any existing, planned, or possible complaint or complaints against the Releasees under the Human Rights Code, arising out of or in respect of the Releasor’s employment, are settled and the terms of this Release and Indemnity apply to such complaints.
7It is important to stress that this case is not being decided on its merits. I have heard no evidence as to the allegations of discrimination made by the applicant against the respondent. The question I must decide is whether it would be an abuse of the Tribunal’s process, considering all the circumstances, to allow the Application to proceed to a hearing, and to require the respondent to defend against the allegations of discrimination.
8This Tribunal has held that filing a human rights application after signing a full and final release can constitute an abuse of the Tribunal’s process. See, for example, Stansens v. Liquor Control Board of Ontario, 2009 HRTO 1560, Sinnett v. Orlick Industries, 2009 HRTO 916, Douse v. Hallmark Canada, 2009 HRTO 1254, and Hynes v. CUMIS Group, 2009 HRTO 1783.
9First, it is necessary to consider whether the release at issue encompassed claims under the Code. In the second paragraph, the release includes broad standard language releasing the respondent from all “…claims arising under or in connection with … the Human Rights Code…”. Further, paragraph (f), as set out above, specifically releases the respondent from any claim specific to the Code. Accordingly, I have no difficulty in finding that this release clearly encompasses claims brought under the Code.
10Parties entering into settlement agreements generally face a variety of pressures, but absent extraordinary circumstances such as those that amount to duress or coercion, they will be held to the terms of their settlement. There is no indication that the applicant was under severe financial pressure or suffered financial hardship or had other hardships as the applicant has not responded to the Tribunal’s correspondence dated February 22 or March 16, 2010. See Sinnett v. Orlick Industries, 2009 HRTO 916 and Kailani v. Securitas Canada, 2009 HRTO 1183.
11I am satisfied that the respondent is entitled to rely upon this release and the applicant is thereby precluded by the release from pursuing this Application under the Code. It would be an abuse of process for the matter to proceed in these circumstances.
12The Application is dismissed.
Dated at Toronto, this 26th day of May, 2010.
”signed by”________________
Alison Renton
Vice-chair