Historic human rights ruling: Alberta tribunal sets record with landmark damages award, redefining the rules on compensation and deterrence
John A.C. Morse and Lauren Sorel
The Human Rights Tribunal of Alberta (the “Tribunal”) recently awarded three complainants a total of $273,274.91 in compensation, with $155,000.00 of this amount designated as general damages – a new record in Canadian human rights law. This landmark decision not only raises the bar for compensation but also underscores the importance of deterrence against discriminatory actions, particularly those related to sexual and gender-based discrimination.
Case Overview: Oliva, Pascoe, and Strong v. Gursoy, 2024 AHRC 45
This case involved three female employees (Oliva, Pascoe, and Strong) of TJ Construction Management Ltd. (“TJCM”), each of whom left their positions after being subjected to severe sexual harassment and discrimination based on gender and physical disability by their boss, Gursoy.
- Oliva was employed by TJCM for just over one year. She experienced various instances of sexual harassment and gender-based discrimination due to inappropriate comments, touching, and requests from Gursoy. Additionally, the Tribunal found that Gursoy engaged in discrimination based on physical disability by demanding details of a medical diagnosis that were irrelevant to Olivia’s employment.
- Pascoe worked with TJCM for approximately one month. Her complaint mirrored Oliva’s, involving inappropriate sexual comments, advances, and touching by Gursoy.
- Strong, the third employee, worked for TJCM for approximately eight months. She was also subjected to inappropriate touching and suggestions by Gursoy and faced additional mistreatment, including being berated and demoted due to her pregnancy.
Each of the complaints was upheld despite being untested by the Respondent and based solely on documentary evidence and hearing submissions, as Gursoy was removed from the proceedings for his “refusal to treat the complaints with civility and respect.”
While the general damages were distributed among the complainants, the $75,000.00 awarded to Oliva is the highest individual award of general damages in the human rights context. The substantial award in this case was supported by the finding that Gursoy’s conduct was “deserving of denunciation” and had severe impacts on each complainant, particularly Oliva, who suffered from depression as a result of her employment with TJCM.
In a separate decision, the Tribunal awarded significant costs related to these proceedings, granting each complainant $10,000 despite no evidence of substantial legal fees incurred. The Tribunal deemed a costs award appropriate due to Gursoy’s “constantly egregious behaviour.”
Implications
This decision signifies a shift toward using general damages not only for compensation but also as a punitive measure to deter serious discriminatory behaviour. Employers must now be more vigilant in preventing and addressing such misconduct to avoid substantial penalties. Proactive measures include maintaining a safe work environment, implementing clear anti-discrimination policies, conducting fair investigations, and seeking legal advice early.
This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment Group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
By Kevin Landry On November 9 2023, Bill C-365, An Act respecting the implementation of a consumer-led banking system for Canadians (“C-365”), short titled as the ‘Consumer-led Banking Act’ was read in the House of…
Read MoreBy Jennifer Taylor The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal (“NSCA”) has issued an important decision clarifying the test to disallow a limitations defence. The decision, Halifax (Regional Municipality) v Carvery (“Carvery”), has real implications for personal…
Read MoreBy Deanne MacLeod, K.C., Burtley Francis & David Slipp On September 21, 2023, the Federal Government introduced Bill C-56: An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act and the Competition Act (“Bill C-56”), with the…
Read MoreBy Nancy Rubin, K.C. and Lauren Agnew The long-awaited Green Choice Program Regulations (N.S. Reg. 155/2023) were released by the provincial government on September 8, 2023, offering some clarity into the practical implementation of Nova…
Read MoreBy Koren Thomson, John Samms, and Matthew Raske The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal has held that the Information and Privacy Commissioner for this province (the “Commissioner”) does not have the authority to order…
Read MoreBy Perlene Morrison, K.C. Municipalities are required to pass code of conduct bylaws in accordance with section 107 of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). Subsection 107(1) of the MGA specifically states that a municipality’s…
Read MoreBy Sheila Mecking and Kathleen Starke On August 23, 2023, the Ontario Superior Court (“ONSC”) upheld a complaints decision which ordered a psychologist to complete a continuing education or remedial program regarding professionalism in public…
Read MoreBy Dante Manna As we advised in a previous podcast, all federal employers with at least ten employees[1] have been subject to the Pay Equity Act [2] (“PEA”) and Pay Equity Regulations [3] (“Regulations”) since…
Read MoreBy Nancy Rubin, K.C. Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) recently published a draft of the Clean Electricity Regulations (CER). The proposed Regulations work toward achieving a net-zero electricity-generating sector, helping Canada become a net-zero…
Read MoreBy Stephen Penney & Matthew Raske In the recent decision Index Investment Inc. v. Paradise (Town), 2023 NLSC 112, the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador validated the Town of Paradise’s decision to rezone lands…
Read More