Jordan Lester

The Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario brought professional misconduct allegations against a member and a Certificate of Authorization holder for issuing deficient structural drawings that failed to properly account for snow loads.

The respondents admitted to the allegations, acknowledging the designs failed to meet the standard of a reasonable and prudent practitioner and did not comply with the Ontario Building Code.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission to revoke the member's licence and publish his name.

For the holder, the Committee ordered a reprimand to be recorded on the register for one year and publication of its name, noting its extensive cooperation and remediation efforts.

The respondent requested that the human rights application be dismissed as an abuse of process due to the applicant's failure to produce medical and income records as previously ordered.

The applicant claimed she did not have the documents in her possession.

The Tribunal held that a production order requires a party to produce documents reasonably within their control, and that the requested documents (such as EI and tax records) were within the applicant's control.

The Tribunal declined to dismiss the application at this stage but ordered the applicant to produce the documents or specifically explain her efforts to obtain them, noting that unexplained failure could lead to an adverse inference or amount to an abuse of process.

The applicant requested that her doctor be permitted to testify by teleconference because the doctor now lives in Whitehorse.

The respondent did not respond to the request.

The Tribunal granted the request, noting that such requests are frequently granted when credibility is unlikely to be an issue.

The applicant, a manager trainee, went on medical leave due to a leg injury.

Despite keeping his manager informed and providing medical notes, he was terminated when he attempted to return to work, with the employer claiming he had abandoned his position.

The employer also refused to rehire him due to concerns he might reinjure himself.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had a disability and that the termination and refusal to rehire were discriminatory under the Human Rights Code.

The applicant was awarded $17,777 for lost earnings and $17,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.

The respondent employer filed a Request for Order During Proceedings to add Goldcorp Canada Ltd. as a respondent to the human rights application.

The applicant, who alleged failure to accommodate her mould allergy, opposed the request.

The Tribunal denied the request, holding that it is up to the applicant to determine the respondents against whom she wishes to proceed, and she had made no allegations against Goldcorp.

The respondent requested the production of the applicant's medical and employment records in a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment based on disability.

The applicant opposed the request as untimely.

The Tribunal found the request was not premature as the deadline for disclosure of arguably relevant documents had passed.

The Tribunal ordered the applicant to produce the requested documents, finding them arguably relevant to the issues of accommodation, mitigation, and remedy.

The respondent requested that the Tribunal defer consideration of the human rights application pending the outcome of the applicant's WSIB appeal.

The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the WSIB proceeding concerned the cause of the applicant's injury, whereas the human rights application concerned the respondent's duty to accommodate the applicant's disability.

As the duty to accommodate applies regardless of the cause of the disability, the facts and issues did not overlap sufficiently to warrant deferral.

The applicant, a Caucasian employee who followed First Nations spiritual practices, alleged discrimination and harassment by two board members of the Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre.

The Tribunal found that one respondent, Chris Carter, harassed the applicant by questioning his right to possess traditional medicines because he was not a First Nations person, making comments at an AGM questioning the job security of non-First Nations staff, and making derogatory comments about the applicant's family status after his dismissal.

The application against the other respondent, Ralph Johnson, was dismissed as there was no evidence connecting his actions to a Code ground.

The Tribunal awarded the applicant $3,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect against Chris Carter.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment.

The application was previously withdrawn against the organizational respondent, Nishnawbe-Gamik Friendship Centre.

The individual respondent, Ralph Johnson, requested to be removed as a party.

The Tribunal directed submissions on whether the Centre remained a proper respondent.

The Tribunal treated the applicant's submissions as a request for reconsideration of the withdrawal order and denied it, finding no compelling or extraordinary circumstances to reverse the withdrawal.

Consequently, the Centre was not reinstated as a respondent.

Because no organizational respondent remained, the Tribunal denied the individual respondent's request to be removed from the application.