3 total
Request to re-activate deferred human rights application denied as concurrent civil action remains ongoing.
The applicant requested the re-activation of a human rights application that had been deferred on consent due to a concurrent civil action.
The applicant argued the civil action was taking too long and had become protracted by a third-party action.
The Tribunal denied the request, finding that the civil action was ongoing, there was substantial overlap in the claims, and the circumstances did not warrant re-activating an application that would require adjudicating the exact issues currently before the court.
Human rights application dismissed; employee failed to establish disability or that employer knew of accommodation needs.
The applicant, a program coordinator at a residential rehabilitation facility, alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of disability and reprisal.
He claimed he was denied time off to deal with stress and depression and was subsequently terminated.
The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to establish he suffered from a mental health disability at the material time or that he had disclosed any such disability or need for accommodation to his employer.
The Tribunal accepted the employer's evidence that the termination was for cause due to ongoing performance issues that culminated in a failure to ensure adequate care for a vulnerable client.
The application was dismissed.
Human rights application deferred pending conclusion of ongoing grievance arbitration dealing with identical harassment allegations.
The applicant, a teacher, filed a human rights application alleging a course of harassment by the respondent school board and individual respondents.
The respondents requested that the application be deferred pending the outcome of an ongoing grievance arbitration dealing with the same issues, and that parts of the application be dismissed for delay or because they were resolved by prior settlements.
The Tribunal deferred the application, finding that the grievance arbitration was dealing with indistinguishable facts and issues and should be allowed to conclude first.
The Tribunal declined to dismiss any parts of the application for delay or abuse of process at this preliminary stage, noting that the respondents could renew those requests if the application is re-opened after the arbitration.
