Human Rights Awards: Update on the Ceiling
We reported previously on the decision of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal in Kelly v. University of British Columbia.
Dr. Kelly had been diagnosed with ADHD. As a result of discrimination by the University of British Columbia, he lost the opportunity to complete his medical residency program, and to become licensed and practice medicine. He suffered humiliation and embarrassment as a result of the discrimination he faced. The Tribunal awarded him $75,000 as general damages for injury to for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect and $385,194.70 as damages for lost wages.
The BC Supreme Court recently concluded that the award of $75,000 for general damages was patently unreasonable and it was set aside. The court remitted the case to the BC Human Rights Tribunal to re-determine the award. The Court held that “the decision must still be based on evidence and reason and in my view that has not occurred in this case.”
While this reduced the high-water mark for human rights damages in BC, in Ontario, there has not been a similar judicial review of the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) in O.P.T. v. Presteve Foods Ltd. In that case, adjudicator Mark Hart ordered a corporation and its owner to pay a vulnerable temporary foreign worker $150,000 in general damages because the owner sexually harassed and sexually assaulted the worker.
This decision raised the highest general damages award in Ontario significantly. It also signaled that employers who dramatically violate human rights legislation will suffer serious consequences. We remain interested to see whether the HRTO continues to order significant damage awards for severe human rights violations.
If you have questions about human rights, please contact us at [email protected] or 647-204-8107.
The material and information in this blog and this website are for general information only. They should not be relied on as legal advice or opinion. The authors make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of any information referred to in this blog or its links. No person should act or refrain from acting in reliance on any information found on this website or blog. Readers should obtain appropriate professional advice from a lawyer duly licensed in the relevant jurisdiction. These materials do not create a lawyer-client relationship between you and any of the authors or the MacLeod Law Firm.
Recent Posts
Recent Posts
Justice for Unionized Employees
Unionized employees often seek our advice regarding human rights issues in their workplace. Sometimes this is because human rights violations have occurred and the union is not assisting them. Other times, the union itself may be part of the problem. The rights of...
Employee Entitlements Upon Termination
Termination is a stressful experience for any employee. An employee who has been fired needs to understand what their employer owes them, and what their employer is offering them. When employers do not make this clear, additional damages could be due to the employee....
Notice of Termination: Appeal Court Weighs in
When terminated, an employee should generally receive reasonable notice of termination or pay instead of notice. This is unless the employee has signed a contract that contains an enforceable termination clause (which we’ve written about here). The calculation of the...