Peters v. United Parcel Service Canada Ltd. and Gordon

Peters v. United Parcel Service Canada Ltd. and Gordon

The Tribunal held that (1) the individual respondent's personnel file must be reviewed and any documents arguably relevant to his conduct, behaviour and performance produced because relevance is plausible and the individual did not object to disclosure; (2) UPS must produce Canadian documents that record or address counts and outcomes of sexual harassment complaints, informal investigations, findings and sanctions/compensation for the three-year period preceding the complainant's departure through referral to the Tribunal, because such material is arguably relevant to UPS's s.65(2) defence regarding knowledge and due diligence; (3) requests for materials from UPS-US are dismissed because...

Citation
2020 CHRT 18
Parties
Complainant: Tesha Peters; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent (corporate): United Parcel Service Canada Ltd.; Respondent (individual): Linden Gordon
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Interim Ruling on Disclosure Motion
Outcome
Motion partially granted in part and dismissed in part; directed disclosure from UPS Canada; requests against UPS-US dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Harassment, Document Production and Disclosure, Vicarious Liability, Due Diligence Defence (s.65(2)), Privilege (settlement), Inter Jurisdictional Relevance
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Privacy Law Procedural Law Sexual Harassment Document Production and Disclosure Vicarious Liability +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tesha Peters

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

United Parcel Service Canada Ltd.

Respondent (corporate)

Linden Gordon

Respondent (individual)

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Interim Ruling on Disclosure Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the individual respondent's complete personnel file must be produced
  2. 2 Whether UPS must produce aggregate and outcome data regarding internal complaints and informal investigations of sexual harassment in Canada
  3. 3 Whether UPS must produce documents or make inquiries of its US parent (UPS-US) about policies, investigations or litigation

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that (1) the individual respondent's personnel file must be reviewed and any documents arguably relevant to his conduct, behaviour and performance produced because relevance is plausible and the individual did not object to disclosure; (2) UPS must produce Canadian documents that record or address counts and outcomes of sexual harassment complaints, informal investigations, findings and sanctions/compensation for the three-year period preceding the complainant's departure through referral to the Tribunal, because such material is arguably relevant to UPS's s.65(2) defence regarding knowledge and due diligence; (3) requests for materials from UPS-US are dismissed because...

Court Disposition

Motion partially granted in part and dismissed in part; directed disclosure from UPS Canada; requests against UPS-US dismissed.

Orders

  • UPS to review Linden Gordon's personnel file and produce any documents arguably relevant to his conduct, behaviour and performance in the workplace to the parties by July 10, 2020.
  • UPS to disclose any documents in Canada in its power, possession or control that record or address the number of sexual harassment complaints, the number of informal investigations, the number of complaints or investigations where it was confirmed that sexual harassment occurred and documents showing...