The defendant, 3M Canada Company, brought a motion under Rule 21.01(1)(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure to strike the plaintiff's statement of claim in its entirety, arguing it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
The defendant contended that human rights claims fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and that there is no independent common law duty to accommodate.
The plaintiff's claim alleged constructive dismissal due to a poisoned work environment stemming from the defendant's failure to accommodate his disability and discriminatory treatment.
The court applied the "plain and obvious" test, reading the statement of claim generously.
It found that the claim, in pith and substance, was for constructive dismissal arising from a breach of the employment contract, not solely an infringement of the Human Rights Code.
The court affirmed that allegations of discrimination and failure to accommodate can be relevant to a constructive dismissal claim, distinguishing it from actions based solely on the Code.
The motion to strike was dismissed, and the plaintiff was awarded costs.
