Donovan v. (Waterloo) Police Services Board

Scuric v. Toronto Transit Commission

Human Rights: Mask Policy & Disability Accommodation

This case involves a human rights complaint alleging discrimination based on disability where the plaintiff claimed a migraine disorder required accommodation from a mandatory mask policy. The court found that no prima facie discrimination was established because the link between the migraine and mask intolerance was not proven, resulting in no duty to accommodate. Additionally, the plaintiff's constructive dismissal claim was dismissed as the refusal to comply with the essential masking term constituted repudiation by the employee, though the court awarded one week of sick leave for a promised coded sick week.

Ontario Public Service Employees Union et al. v. The Crown in Right of Ontario

Charter Challenge: Freedom of Association in Public Sector

This is a merits decision regarding a Charter challenge to the government's cancellation of a Task Force via Order in Council. The court applied the test from Health Services and Mounted Police to determine if there was substantial interference with freedom of association and collective bargaining rights. The application was dismissed as the government was not responsible for the inability to exercise associational rights, and the Task Force Letter of Understanding did not bind the Government.

Maule v. IBM Canada Ltd.

Systemic Age Discrimination: Motion to Strike Pleadings

This is an interlocutory motion to strike pleadings in a wrongful dismissal and human rights action against IBM Canada Ltd. The central issue was whether allegations of systemic age discrimination against executive-level employees and references to the termination of other employees were relevant, provable, or constituted an abuse of process. The court applied Rule 25.11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure to determine if these pleadings should be struck for being overly broad or irrelevant.

Pandher v. University of Windsor et al

Pandher v. University of Windsor: HR Claims in Civil Action

This is a civil procedure motion regarding a plaintiff's request to amend a Statement of Claim to include human rights claims and add new defendants after the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) dismissed related applications. The court addressed whether the amendments introduced new causes of action, whether claims against new defendants were statute-barred by limitation periods, and costs associated with an abandoned injunction motion.

Khanom v. Idealogic PDS Inc.

This case addresses the burden of proof and elements required to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the Human Rights Code of Ontario, specifically concerning the duty to accommodate. It also touches upon issues of reasonable notice, likely in the context of remedies or procedural timelines within the human rights framework.