Goodwin v. Birkett

Goodwin v. Birkett

On the balance of probabilities the Tribunal accepted the complainant's credible, detailed evidence and rejected the respondent's inconsistent account; the conduct met the statutory definition of sexual harassment under s.14 and thus constituted discrimination, entitling the complainant to $2,500 for pain and suffering and $2,500 special compensation with interest; request for apology denied as beyond Tribunal power.

Citation
2004 CHRT 29
Parties
Complainant: Sue Goodwin; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: David Birkett
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint (employment) / Final Decision of Tribunal
Outcome
Complaint substantiated; respondent found to have discriminated by sexual harassment
Legal Topics
Sexual Harassment, Sex Discrimination, Remedies, Employer Response
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Sexual Harassment Sex Discrimination Remedies Employer Response

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sue Goodwin

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

David Birkett

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint (employment) / Final Decision of Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent sexually harassed the complainant contrary to s.14 of the Canadian Human Rights Act
  2. 2 Whether the complainant is entitled to non-pecuniary damages and special compensation under s.53
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal can order a letter of apology

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Tribunal accepted the complainant's credible, detailed evidence and rejected the respondent's inconsistent account; the conduct met the statutory definition of sexual harassment under s.14 and thus constituted discrimination, entitling the complainant to $2,500 for pain and suffering and $2,500 special compensation with interest; request for apology denied as beyond Tribunal power.

Court Disposition

Complaint substantiated; respondent found to have discriminated by sexual harassment

Orders

  • Respondent to pay the complainant $2,500 in compensation for pain and suffering (s.53(2)(e))
  • Respondent to pay the complainant $2,500 in special compensation (s.53(3))