Dorais v. Canadian Armed Forces

Dorais v. Canadian Armed Forces

Tribunal finds CAF’s Common Enrolment Medical Standard (CEMS) is a justified bona fide occupational requirement when applied appropriately to implement universality of service, but CAF failed to meet its duty to accommodate and did not conduct an adequate, individualized medical assessment of Mr. Dorais (including failing to request necessary medical records or to specify what 'new pertinent medical information' would be required), rendering the denial of his re-enrolment a discriminatory practice under s.7(a) of the CHRA; systemic, reflexive exclusion of applicants with PTSD was not established.

Citation
2025 CHRT 96
Parties
Complainant: Joshua Dorais; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Canadian Armed Forces
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Discrimination (employment) / Tribunal Decision (final)
Outcome
Complaint partly founded: individual discriminatory practice found (inadequate individualized assessment and failure to accommodate Dorais) but systemic policy (CEMS) found justified as bona fide occupational requirement when properly applied; systemic PTSD exclusion not proven.
Legal Topics
Discrimination, Duty to Accommodate, Universality of Service, Medical Fitness Standards (cems), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (ptsd), Bona Fide Occupational Requirement, Remedies
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Employment Law Disability Law Administrative Law Military Law Discrimination Duty to Accommodate Universality of Service +4 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joshua Dorais

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Canadian Armed Forces

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Discrimination (employment) / Tribunal Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant had or was perceived to have a disability
  2. 2 Whether CAF refused employment and/or pursued a policy or practice that deprived the applicant of employment (s.7(a) and s.10(a) CHRA)
  3. 3 Whether disability/perceived disability was a factor in the adverse impact

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal finds CAF’s Common Enrolment Medical Standard (CEMS) is a justified bona fide occupational requirement when applied appropriately to implement universality of service, but CAF failed to meet its duty to accommodate and did not conduct an adequate, individualized medical assessment of Mr. Dorais (including failing to request necessary medical records or to specify what 'new pertinent medical information' would be required), rendering the denial of his re-enrolment a discriminatory practice under s.7(a) of the CHRA; systemic, reflexive exclusion of applicants with PTSD was not established.

Court Disposition

Complaint partly founded: individual discriminatory practice found (inadequate individualized assessment and failure to accommodate Dorais) but systemic policy (CEMS) found justified as bona fide occupational requirement when properly applied; systemic PTSD exclusion not proven.

Orders

  • Canadian Armed Forces shall pay Joshua Dorais $9,000 CAD for pain and suffering under s.53(2)(e) of the CHRA.
  • Canadian Armed Forces shall pay Joshua Dorais $4,000 CAD in special compensation under s.53(3) of the CHRA.