Bayrock v. Correctional Service Canada

Bayrock v. Correctional Service Canada

The Tribunal found discrimination proven because the Complainant’s disability was a factor in her termination and the Respondent failed to demonstrate that it could not accommodate her without undue hardship, having not meaningfully engaged in the accommodation process or shown evidence that accommodation was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2025 CHRT 9
Parties
Complainant: Yaroslava Bayrock; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Correctional Service Canada
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint Employment Discrimination / Decision
Outcome
Discrimination in employment on the basis of disability substantiated; harassment and systemic discrimination claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Accommodation, Termination, Harassment, Systemic Discrimination, Damages
Source Language
english
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Disability Law Accommodation Termination Harassment Systemic Discrimination +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yaroslava Bayrock

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Correctional Service Canada

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint Employment Discrimination / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the Complainant discriminated against in employment on the basis of disability contrary to s.7 of the CHRA?
  2. 2 Did the Complainant experience workplace harassment contrary to s.14(1)(c) of the CHRA?
  3. 3 Did the Respondent engage in systemic discrimination contrary to s.10 of the CHRA?

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found discrimination proven because the Complainant’s disability was a factor in her termination and the Respondent failed to demonstrate that it could not accommodate her without undue hardship, having not meaningfully engaged in the accommodation process or shown evidence that accommodation was impossible; harassment and systemic discrimination claims were dismissed; damages of $7,000 plus simple interest awarded.

Court Disposition

Discrimination in employment on the basis of disability substantiated; harassment and systemic discrimination claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Award $5,000 under section 53(2)(e) CHRA for pain and suffering.
  • Award $2,000 under section 53(3) CHRA for reckless discrimination.