Meaghen A. Russell

The applicant filed an application alleging discrimination by the respondent.

A summary hearing was scheduled to determine if the application should be dismissed for having no reasonable prospect of success.

The applicant received proper notice but failed to attend the teleconference hearing.

Consequently, the adjudicator dismissed the application as abandoned.

The applicant, a sales representative, alleged discrimination in employment based on ethnic origin, claiming a senior representative referred to her as 'that Chinese girl' and that she received inadequate supplies and support.

Following the applicant's evidence at a summary hearing, the respondent requested the application be dismissed.

The Tribunal found the only evidence linking the alleged adverse treatment to the applicant's ethnic origin was hearsay, to which it attached no weight.

Concluding the application had no reasonable prospect of success, the Tribunal dismissed the application.

The applicant filed a human rights application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of ethnic origin and reprisal.

The Tribunal held a summary hearing to determine if the application had a reasonable prospect of success.

The Tribunal found that the discrimination claim, which included allegations of discriminatory comments and adverse treatment regarding sales territories and supplies, had a reasonable prospect of success and allowed it to proceed.

However, the Tribunal dismissed the reprisal claim, finding no evidence that the respondent intentionally breached the applicant's privacy in retaliation for her asserting her rights under the Code.

Following a motion for summary judgment in an employment dispute, the court had dismissed several tort and Charter claims but allowed the claims for constructive dismissal and wrongful dismissal to proceed to trial.

The parties disputed entitlement to costs of the motion.

The court held that the motion resulted in mixed success but considered a written offer to settle made under Rule 49 when exercising its discretion under Rule 49.13 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Although the technical cost consequences of Rule 49.10 did not apply to a motion decision, the offer was relevant to costs.

The moving party was awarded partial indemnity costs from the date of the offer to settle and certain additional costs relating to adjournments and abandoned motions.