Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario Dismisses Application due to Delay and Lack of Good Faith

Strategic Insights -

Catherine Irwin, a self-represented applicant, alleged discrimination with respect to employment on the grounds of disability contrary to the Human Rights Code. However, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, upon reviewing the case, determined that the application was filed more than one year after the last alleged incident of discrimination without a good faith justification. The Tribunal also found that the applicant failed to provide medical evidence demonstrating a disability that was so debilitating as to prevent her from pursuing her legal rights under the Code. As a result, the Tribunal concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.

Key Takeaways:

  • The applicant, Catherine Irwin, alleged discrimination on the grounds of disability with respect to employment, but the Tribunal found that the application was filed too late without a good faith justification.
  • The applicant failed to provide medical evidence demonstrating a disability that was so debilitating as to prevent her from pursuing her legal rights under the Code.
  • The Tribunal specifically highlighted the lack of submissions on the issue of good faith and the inability to conclude on review of the medical evidence that good faith existed.
  • The case was dismissed due to the delay and lack of good faith, rather than on the merits of the case.
  • The Tribunal's decision cites the case of Paul James v York University and Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, 2015 ONSC 2234, which established the standard for evaluating good faith and disability.
  • The applicant's treating psychologist identified impairment from 2017 to 2021, but there was no evidence that this impairment prevented the applicant from pursuing her legal rights.

Statistics:

  • 60 days: the timeframe given to the applicant to file medical evidence and accompanying submissions on good faith.
  • 2017: the year the applicant left her job due to impairment.
  • 2021: the year the applicant filed her human rights application.
  • 2018: the year a doctor's note confirmed the applicant was capable of 'light activities around the house'.
  • September 2024: the month the applicant submitted materials in response to the Case Assessment Direction.
  • 2015: the year the Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision in Paul James v York University and Ontario Human Rights Tribunal was issued.

Sources:

  • HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO Catherine Irwin Applicant -and- Power Workers Union and Ontario Power Generation Respondents (2024)
  • Paul James v York University and Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, 2015 ONSC 2234