Moniz v. Fedex Ground Package System Limited

Moniz v. Fedex Ground Package System Limited

Because the complainant placed his physical and mental health squarely at issue, the medical information sought (list of medical providers since Jan 1, 2015 and authorization for Oshawa Clinic Group records) and the 2019 Notice of Assessment are arguably relevant and their probative value outweighs privacy concerns; however, broader financial disclosure of payments from numerous listed entities was denied because respondent failed to establish a sufficient basis beyond speculation and the complainant has affirmatively denied such income or business ownership.

Citation
2021 CHRT 16
Parties
Complainant: Jonathan Moniz; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Fedex Ground Package System Ltd
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint (canadian Human Rights Act S.7) / Interim Ruling on Disclosure Motion
Outcome
Motion allowed in part
Legal Topics
Disability Discrimination, Disclosure/discovery, Medical Records, Financial Disclosure, Remedies Lost Wages
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Privacy/medical Information Disability Discrimination Disclosure/discovery Medical Records Financial Disclosure +1 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jonathan Moniz

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Fedex Ground Package System Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint (canadian Human Rights Act S.7) / Interim Ruling on Disclosure Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should order disclosure of medical records and a list of medical providers since January 1, 2015
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should order release of medical records from the Oshawa Clinic Group
  3. 3 Whether financial disclosure beyond the complainant's statements is required, including income from specific entities and tax filings

Ratio Decidendi

Because the complainant placed his physical and mental health squarely at issue, the medical information sought (list of medical providers since Jan 1, 2015 and authorization for Oshawa Clinic Group records) and the 2019 Notice of Assessment are arguably relevant and their probative value outweighs privacy concerns; however, broader financial disclosure of payments from numerous listed entities was denied because respondent failed to establish a sufficient basis beyond speculation and the complainant has affirmatively denied such income or business ownership.

Court Disposition

Motion allowed in part

Orders

  • Within 15 days disclose a list of all medical professionals seen since January 1, 2015
  • Within 15 days sign an unaltered Consent and Authorization for Release of Medical Information for the Oshawa Clinic Group covering records since January 1, 2015