Human Rights Commission decision not to investigate complaint was patently unreasonable where arbitrator did not address discrimination.
The appellant appealed a Divisional Court decision dismissing her application for judicial review of the Ontario Human Rights Commission's decisions.
The Commission had declined to deal with her sexual harassment and discrimination complaints under s. 34(1)(a) of the Human Rights Code, stating they were more appropriately dealt with under the Labour Relations Act through her union grievance.
The Court of Appeal found the Commission's decision patently unreasonable because the arbitrator had not actually dealt with the human rights issues, and the Commission failed to assess appropriateness on a case-by-case basis.
The Court also found the Commission misunderstood its reconsideration power under s. 37 by requiring new facts.
The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the Commission.
Jean Thomas v. Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2001 ONCA 5844
