|
OUR PUBLICATIONS
The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 – What Does it Mean for Lawyers?
By Andrew Pinto, Patrick James, and Christian Vernon
Lawyers need to be at the forefront of advances in the law of disability accommodation and accessibility. However, not all lawyers are fully aware of their legal obligations to accommodate persons with disabilities. Beyond being advocates and trusted advisors, we are also employers and service providers to the public. In these capacities, it is important that we know and understand our obligations to ensure that the vital legal services we provide are accessible to all. [Read more.]
The case comments and tables [below] represent our survey of recent cases that have considered the standards of review applicable to Ontario administrative decision-makers, and other current issues in administrative law. [Read more.]
Top Ten Things Condo Managers and Boards Should Know About Human Rights in Ontario
By Christian Vernon
In our practice we often encounter people who believe that their human rights were violated because someone has treated them badly, shouted at them, fired them from their jobs, spread rumours about them, overcharged them for something, etc. Whether we are acting for Respondents (Defendants), or for Applicants (Plaintiffs), we always test the evidence to determine if there is a nexus between the conduct that is being complained of and the specific protections offered by the Human Rights Code. [Read more.]
Disclosure Issues in Administrative Proceedings
By Andrew Pinto and Niiti Simmonds
In this age of WikiLeaks, social networking and The Millennium Trilogy, the issue of disclosure is both front page news and bedside reading. At its best, disclosure can separate truth from fiction; at its worst, disclosure can simply bury the truth with fiction, and kill more trees. The
right to disclosure is a vital component of procedural fairness in administrative proceedings, and
originates in the principle audi alteram partem. Procedural fairness requires that individuals,
whose rights, privileges or interests are to be affected by an administrative decision-making
process, be provided with adequate information in order to know and respond to the case to be
met. [Read more.]
Remedies Available to Employees and Timeliness of Complaints under Bill 168
By Andrew Pinto and Niiti Simmonds
As a result of Bill 168, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, (the "OHSA" or "Act") now
imposes obligations on employers to maintain policies and programs with respect to preventing both workplace violence and harassment. While the requirement to maintain such policies and programs is well established, what is less certain is what remedies will be available to an employee who brings a complaint regarding workplace violence or harassment. The OHSA does not set out a Tribunal where an employee may file a complaint concerning workplace
violence or harassment. Bill 168 is unlike the Ontario Human Rights Code which provides for
the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO), an independent tribunal, where complaints of
discrimination and harassment based on prohibited grounds (such as race, age, gender, etc.)
can be filed and where remedies are ordered in proven cases. [Read more.]
Procedural Issues: How to Get What You Want/Need
By Andrew Pinto and Christian Vernon
As the Human Rights Tribunal's processes are becoming more developed and widelyunderstood, the opportunities for using these processes strategically are increasing. For both Applicants and Respondents there are particular junctures in the Part IV Application process where a strategic advantage may be gained or lost. The disclosure regime under the Rules of
Procedure, for example, can be used by Applicants and Respondents to gain leverage with
regard to a potential settlement of an Application, and it can be used at the same time to narrow the issues for hearing and ready the evidence. [Read more.]
Administrative Law Developments in Ontario & Standard of Review Update
By Andrew Wray and Christian Vernon
The case comments and tables below represent our survey of recent cases that have considered the standard of review applicable to Ontario administrative decision-makers, and other current issues in administrative law. [Read more.]
Company Columbos: "Workplace Investigations and.... Just One More Thing
By Andrew Pinto and Christian Vernon
When an employer has grounds to believe that one or more of its employees are engaged in activity that is contrary to the company policy and/or contrary to law, there are a number of important issues to consider when deciding how to proceed. These issues can be broken down into a series of questions. The following discussion reflects some of the development in recent cases that have addressed the subject in the workplace investigations. [Read more.]
Employment Law for the General Practitioner: Using Changes to the Rules of Civil Procedure Strategically
By Andrew Wray
On January 2010, significant amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure will come into effect. This paper will highlight the strategic considerations that lawyers should have when litigating
employment law matters and how to use the new amendments to their strategic advantage. In
particular, this paper will address the amendments to rules for Discovery, changes to the rules for Summary Judgment, important changes to the Simplified Procedure, the increased monetary
jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court and other noteworthy changes. [Read more.]
Strategic pre-mediation advocacy: Maximizing client satisfaction
By Andrew Pinto
The primary strategy in dealing with wrongful dismissal files in the early stages
involves making judgment calls about which key issues will make a significant
difference to a satisfactory settlement or litigation result in the case. While that
may be true of any legal matter, wrongful dismissal advocacy is particularly
amenable to early settlement or, failing that, adjudication based on a few choice
issues. The reason is that wrongful dismissal litigation typically involves a small
number of key documents (such as the employment contract, termination letter,
performance evaluations or incident report) and is highly fact dependent. Many
of the key facts, such as the data of the employee and employer are well known
by both sides. Even in cases that depend on credibility, the issues themselves
are not difficult to identify although their disposition may be uncertain. [Read more.]
The New Ontario Human Rights System - Practice Tips and Case Update
By Patrick James and Christian Vernon
The Ontario Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19 ("Code") underwent a major
overhaul with the full coming into force of the Human Rights Amendment Act, S.O. 2006,
c. 30, on June 30, 2008. Among other changes, these significant reforms have created a
new human rights process which permits Applicants (formerly known as
"Complainants") to file their Applications directly with the Human Rights Tribunal of
Ontario ("HRTO" or "Tribunal").
This paper outlines important considerations to keep in mind prior to filing an
Application, or a Response to an Application, and provides practical tips and analysis for
both Respondents and Applicants relating to each procedural step leading to an eventual
hearing before the HRTO. [Read more.]
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Khosa represents its first significant guidance with regard to the implementation of the standard of review analysis post-Dunsmuir (Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] 1 S.C.R. 190, 2008 SCC 9). This decision provides some insight into how the standard of review analysis should be conducted after elimination of the most deferential patent unreasonable standard. [Read more.]
|
