Saviye v. Afroglobal Network Inc. and Michael Daramola

Saviye v. Afroglobal Network Inc. and Michael Daramola

The motion to amend was granted because the asserted retaliation arises from the same parties and factual matrix as the original complaint, discloses a tenable claim for retaliation under s.14.1, and allowing the amendment would not prejudice Afroglobal as it has sufficient time and opportunity to respond; merits remain for the hearing.

Citation
2016 CHRT 18
Parties
Complainant: Chiyuka Saviye; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Afroglobal Network Inc.; Respondent: Michael Daramola
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Complaint / Motion to Amend Complaint
Outcome
Motion to amend granted
Legal Topics
Retaliation (section 14.1), Sex Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Amendment of Complaint, Prejudice to Respondent, Tribunal Procedural Discretion
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Retaliation (section 14.1) Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Amendment of Complaint Prejudice to Respondent +1 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chiyuka Saviye

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Afroglobal Network Inc.

Respondent

Michael Daramola

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Complaint / Motion to Amend Complaint

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complaint may be amended to add an allegation of retaliation under s.14.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  2. 2 Whether the alleged retaliation is sufficiently linked to the factual matrix of the original complaint to disclose a tenable claim
  3. 3 Whether allowing the amendment would cause prejudice to the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to amend was granted because the asserted retaliation arises from the same parties and factual matrix as the original complaint, discloses a tenable claim for retaliation under s.14.1, and allowing the amendment would not prejudice Afroglobal as it has sufficient time and opportunity to respond; merits remain for the hearing.

Court Disposition

Motion to amend granted

Orders

  • Complaint amended to include allegation of retaliation contrary to section 14.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act