1,407 results found

In Sharma v. Toronto (City), 2020 HRTO 949, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) provides a roadmap for how employers should determine...

On October 4, 2022, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO), released its decision in Weilgosh v. London District Catholic School Board.

An adjudicator has criticized an employer’s motivational presentation as "offensive, distasteful and inappropriate as a motivational tool", but found that it was not illegal.

Workplace accommodation is a challenging process, often without easy answers.

The position required early morning work.

The Government of Ontario has followed up this past Monday's employment law announcements (summarized in an earlier Insight) with two further announcements...

This case arises from a common business scenario — a fast‑moving asset purchase deal — but resulted in a costly human rights ruling. In Morasse v. Brandt Tractor Ltd., the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (“HRTO” or the “Tribunal”) and, later, the Ontario Divisional Court (the “Court”) confirmed that employees on maternity or parental leave cannot be excluded from hiring decisions during a business transition.

In a recent decision,[1] the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (the "Tribunal") awarded an Applicant $25,000 in damages for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect, as well as damages for lost wages, after her employment was terminated without cause.

December is complex. A third of our statutory holidays are Christian-based, despite our diverse workforce in Canada.

Employers have a responsibility to accommodate employees' family status obligations up to a point of undue hardship.

As the rates of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations continue to climb in many Canadian jurisdictions, with workplace-related outbreaks involved from time to time

Last week, the Canadian federal government approved the Sunrise expansion project, a roughly $4 billion expansion of the Westcoast Energy natural gas pipeline system in British Columbia (Project).

However, in light of recent events, it appears likely that Canada will in fact join the nations that have enacted legislative action to address genetic discrimination.

The bringing of such a court application would be initiated by the individual seeking the physician-assisted death, almost certainly with the assistance of his or her own legal counsel.

In the landmark 2013 decision of Canada v Bedford, the Supreme Court of Canada declared that certain provisions of the Criminal Code violated section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Costs orders in Aboriginal and constitutional litigation have been a challenging issue for the courts.

On January 28, the BC Human Rights Tribunal ("BCHRT") issued a landmark decision granting the largest award for injury to dignity in BC's history