August/September 2016 Human Rights Digest
Volume 83 e-Volume in CHRR Online
July 2016 Human Rights Digest
From Us To Your Inbox
Keep up to date on the
most important new
human rights cases
Delivered to your
electronic inbox for
only $7.50 per issue!
The best source for
CHRR decisions are only available from Canadian Human Rights Reporter Inc.
CHRR decisions are not included in LawSource (Westlaw), Quicklaw (LexisNexis) or CanLII.
Report on the 2016 National Human Rights Tribunals’ Forum
One of the great hallmarks of human rights protection in Canada is the existence of our tribunals and panels responsible for hearing complaints, sifting through evidence and applying the appropriate human rights code. Where complaints are substantiated, the tribunals are responsible for awarding an appropriate remedy, a characteristic that distinguishes Canada from many jurisdictions around the world where human rights laws lack the teeth of enforcement and restitution.
Unfortunately, human rights tribunals in Canada are sometimes perceived as the lost cousins to the more high profile human rights commissions, which exist in 12 of Canada's 14 legal jurisdictions. The commissions generally have broader mandates, which not only include receiving complaints (although not...
$161,737 for Lost Wages Awarded to Person with a Developmental Disability
DISABILITY — EQUAL PAY / Decision on an application alleging discrimination in employment on the basis of disability. The applicant, who is a person with a developmental delay, alleged that while she performed substantially the same duties as general labourers who did not have developmental disabilities, she was paid significantly less. The Tribunal found that the pay differential was a...
What Was Said
ODSP Approach to Self-Employment Discriminates
"We therefore find that we cannot award damages for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect. There is no evidence of bad faith or abuse of power, and conduct on the part of government cannot be said to have been clearly wrong simply because this Tribunal determines, after the fact, that it is discriminatory.”
Human Rights Digest 17-6, August/September 2016