Beauregard v. Canada Post Corp.

Beauregard v. Canada Post Corp.

The complainant failed to establish a prima facie case because the evidence did not prove he had a disability within the meaning of the Act: contemporary medical reports lacked objective symptoms, were inconsistent and administratively driven, the alleged workplace stressor was not established as real rather than perceived, and therefore Canada Post had no discriminatory obligation to accommodate; complaint dismissed.

Citation
2004 CHRT 4
Parties
Complainant: Michel Beauregard; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canada Post Corporation
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act (employment Discrimination Disability) / Tribunal Reasons for Decision (final)
Outcome
Complaint dismissed
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Duty to Accommodate, Termination, Workplace Harassment, Workers' Compensation (csst)
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Labour Law Occupational Health and Safety Disability Discrimination Duty to Accommodate Termination +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michel Beauregard

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canada Post Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Under the Canadian Human Rights Act (employment Discrimination Disability) / Tribunal Reasons for Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant had a disability within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  2. 2 Whether the employer failed to accommodate the complainant's alleged disability
  3. 3 Whether the employer's order to return to work and subsequent termination constituted discrimination under s.7 of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant failed to establish a prima facie case because the evidence did not prove he had a disability within the meaning of the Act: contemporary medical reports lacked objective symptoms, were inconsistent and administratively driven, the alleged workplace stressor was not established as real rather than perceived, and therefore Canada Post had no discriminatory obligation to accommodate; complaint dismissed.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed