Laura Joy

In an interim decision concerning a complex human rights application brought on behalf of temporary foreign workers, the Tribunal resolved several preliminary and case management issues.

The Tribunal clarified that only the sexual harassment claims of specific applicants were continued from the original consolidated proceedings, dismissing attempts to revive or amend other claims due to delay and lack of particularity.

The Tribunal struck portions of the applicant's detailed pleadings relating to previously settled wage claims and general living conditions, while allowing some context evidence.

The Tribunal also ordered the disclosure of materials from a related criminal proceeding against the personal respondent and permitted the use of the preliminary inquiry transcript as sworn testimony.

The respondents sought to dismiss the human rights applications, arguing they were barred by the doctrine of abuse of process and s. 45.1 of the Human Rights Code because the individual respondent had pled guilty to simple assault in criminal court.

The Tribunal held that the acceptance of a guilty plea to non-sexual assault does not imply a finding of factual innocence regarding the sexual assault allegations.

The Tribunal dismissed the respondents' request, allowing the applications to proceed.

The individual respondent requested that the adjudicator recuse himself on the basis of a reasonable apprehension of bias, arguing that the adjudicator's prior ruling granting intervenor status to Justicia for Migrant Workers in the same matter tainted his impartiality.

The Tribunal dismissed the request, holding that making preliminary or case management rulings in advance of a final decision is a fundamental part of active adjudication and does not create a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The individual respondent requested that the Tribunal revisit its previous order granting Justicia for Migrant Workers (J4MW) leave to intervene in the applications.

The applications involved allegations of sexual harassment against migrant workers.

The respondent argued for an in-person hearing on the request and that J4MW lacked a significant interest.

The Tribunal held that there is no right to oral submissions on preliminary issues and declined to revisit its previous order, finding that the social context affecting migrant workers remained relevant to the sexual harassment allegations and potential remedies.