Darlene Damassia-Correa v. Coin Co. International PLC, 2010 HRTO 380

HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO

B E T W E E N:

Darlene Damassia-Correa Applicant

-and-

Coin Co. International PLC Respondent

INTERIM DECISION

Adjudicator: Alan Whyte Date: February 18, 2010 Citation: 2010 HRTO 380 Indexed as: Damassia-Correa v. Coin Co. International

1This is an Application filed under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 as amended (the “Code”), which alleges discrimination in employment on the ground of disability. The Application alleges that the applicant was terminated by the respondent on February 17, 2009 for discriminatory reasons.

2On that date, the applicant signed a letter on company letterhead which confirmed the parties’ agreement to terminate the applicant's employment with the respondent, and sent out the severance arrangements associated with the termination of that employment. The letter does not contain any language directed to the release by the applicant of any or all claims by her against the respondent. The applicant alleges in the Application that she "unwillingly signed the document".

3In its Response, the respondent takes the position that the February 17, 2009 letter constitutes a full and final release which bars the Application.

4In her Reply, the applicant submits that the termination letter does not constitute a full and final release of her claims against the respondent and that it does not contain any such language. The applicant further submits that a party cannot contract out of the Code, and that, therefore, even if the letter constituted a release of the applicant’s claims, it is unenforceable. The applicant also submits that if it is found that a party may contract out of the Code, it is necessary that the party against whom the release is being held must have actual notice that they are waiving their claims under the Code, which can only be accomplished by the document containing explicit reference to the Code. She also submits that at the time of her signing the termination letter, she did not put her mind to the potential human rights claims available to her against the respondent. Finally, the applicant submits that she was not given an opportunity to consult with legal counsel.

5In my view, the termination letter dated November 17, 2009 cannot reasonably be interpreted as constituting a full and final release of the applicant’s claims against the respondent under the Code. Aside from the fact that the word "release" is not used in the document, there is nothing in the letter which can be interpreted as evidence of the applicant giving up her claims under the Code. The Tribunal will process the Application.

6It is not necessary to address the other submissions of the applicant regarding the ability of a party to contract out of the Code, the relevance of her lack of knowledge of potential human rights claims and the possible significance of her having not been given an opportunity to consult with legal counsel.

7I am not seized.