Boukailo v. Canada Post Corporation

Boukailo v. Canada Post Corporation

The Tribunal held that allegations claiming Canada Post caused the workplace injury (unsafe staffing/conditions) exceed the scope of the complaint and the proper forum and struck three sentences from paragraph 2; it declined to strike other contested content (forgery, retaliation, future wage/pension claims) because those allegations are relevant or tenable, ordered that the complaint be amended to include retaliation, required further and better particulars on wage-loss/benefit and future-loss claims (including para 33(c)), and adjourned jurisdictional determination on WCB-related remedy issues to the hearing when evidence and liability are established.

Citation
2021 CHRT 43
Parties
Complainant: Natalia Boukailo; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canada Post Corporation
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Act Inquiry Disability Discrimination / Interim Ruling on Motion to Strike and for Particulars
Outcome
Motion granted in part and dismissed in part: unsafe-work causation sentences struck; refusal to strike allegations of forgery, retaliation and future-loss claims; complaint deemed amended to add retaliation; particulars ordered; WCB-related remedy issue adjourned to hearing.
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Retaliation (s.14.1), Amendment of Complaint/statement of Particulars, Procedural Fairness and Prejudice, Forgery/authenticity of Documents, Remedies Wage Loss and Pension, Jurisdictional Overlap With Workers' Compensation
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Evidence Disability Discrimination Retaliation (s.14.1) Amendment of Complaint/statement of Particulars Procedural Fairness and Prejudice +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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natalia Boukailo

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canada Post Corporation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Act Inquiry Disability Discrimination / Interim Ruling on Motion to Strike and for Particulars

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complained-of new allegations in SOP/Reply exceed scope of original complaint referred by the Commission
  2. 2 Whether allegations that respondent caused workplace injury (unsafe conditions) are within Tribunal jurisdiction or are forum-specific (WCB/Canada Labour Code)
  3. 3 Whether claim for specific wage loss/benefits (para 33(c)) is compensable by Tribunal or exclusively WCB jurisdiction and requires particulars

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that allegations claiming Canada Post caused the workplace injury (unsafe staffing/conditions) exceed the scope of the complaint and the proper forum and struck three sentences from paragraph 2; it declined to strike other contested content (forgery, retaliation, future wage/pension claims) because those allegations are relevant or tenable, ordered that the complaint be amended to include retaliation, required further and better particulars on wage-loss/benefit and future-loss claims (including para 33(c)), and adjourned jurisdictional determination on WCB-related remedy issues to the hearing when evidence and liability are established.

Court Disposition

Motion granted in part and dismissed in part: unsafe-work causation sentences struck; refusal to strike allegations of forgery, retaliation and future-loss claims; complaint deemed amended to add retaliation; particulars ordered; WCB-related remedy issue adjourned to hearing.

Orders

  • The following content in paragraph 2 of the Complainant's Statement of Particulars is struck and will not be considered for purposes of liability: The Respondent failed to provide proper staffing and created unsafe work conditions. I had to work under a lot of stress and pressure because I was asked by management to...
  • The Respondent's motion in relation to paragraph 33(c) (the claimed return-to-work wage loss) is adjourned; Canada Post may renew its motion respecting paragraph 33(c) at the merits hearing.