Resources: Human Rights
-
Doctor Who? Complainant Cannot Generally Rely on Self-Diagnosis When Trying to Establish an Invisible Disability
March 2016
A recent decision of the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Cummings v. Nenan Dane Zaa Deh Zona Family Services Society, demonstrates that a complainant cannot rely as a general matter on a self-diagnosis when trying to establish a mental disability or a disability that is not self-evident. Objective, credible medical evidence is generally required.
Read More +
-
Employers Not Obligated to Accommodate Personal Choices – Including Breastfeeding
February 2016
The right to breastfeed in public has made headlines of late, but the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Flatt v. Attorney General of Canada, 2015 FCA 250 makes it clear that choosing to breastfeed in most instances is just that – a choice, and not one that will necessarily be protected by human rights legislation in the context of work obligations.
Read More +
-
Cancer Patient’s Employment Goes Up In Smoke After Tribunal Dismisses complaint Alleging Discrimination for Marijuana Use on the Job: French v. Selkin Logging Ltd., 2015 BCHRT 101 (Blasina)
February 2016
John French claimed his employer, Selkin Logging Ltd., discriminated against him in employment on the ground of physical disability when he was discharged for refusing to give up smoking marijuana at the workplace.
Read More +
-
Tribunal Costs Award Goes Against Complainant
December 2015
A recent decision in Singh v. Revera Home Health, [2015] B.C.H.R.T.D. No. 800 by Chair Bernd Walter of the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal will be of interest to users of the human rights system, particularly in jurisdictions like British Columbia or Ontario which have a “direct access” model.
Read More +
-
$75,000 award for injury to dignity = “patently unreasonable”
December 2015
In January 2014, we reported on Kelly v. University of British Columbia (No. 4), 2013 BCHRT 302, a case in which the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) more than doubled its previous record for injury to dignity damages by awarding the complainant $75,000 (the “Tribunal Decision”).
Read More +
-
BC Human Rights Tribunal Rules Exclusion from Disability Benefits and Mandatory Retirement Not Discriminatory
July 2015
The BC Human Rights Tribunal (“Tribunal”) recently considered the application of s. 13(3)(b) in two age discrimination complaints. The Tribunal dismissed both complaints on preliminary applications.
Read More +
-
“Physical Disability” Defined – A Critical Threshold Question
January 2015
Human rights statutes across Canada prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of, among other things, “physical disability”. Sometimes it is clear that an employee is physically disabled, and entitled to statutory protection. However, there are other times when it is unclear if an employee’s medical circumstances fit the definition.
Read More +
-
Establishing Undue Hardship Is Possible: Wilcox v. University of British Columbia and others, 2014 BCHRT 228
December 2014
A recent decision of the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, Wilcox v. University of British Columbia and others, 2014 BCHRT 228, demonstrates that undue hardship is not an impossible threshold to meet, even for a large and diverse employer such as a university.
Read More +