Closs v. Fulton Forwarders Incorporated and Stephen Fulton

Closs v. Fulton Forwarders Incorporated and Stephen Fulton

Tribunal found the complainant established prima facie discrimination under paragraph 7(a) on the grounds of disability (leg injury and lupus) because issuance of the ROE and replacement of duties linked to medical condition, and under paragraph 7(b) on the ground of family status because requests for leave after miscarriages were denied without adequate individualized accommodation; respondent failed to justify actions or show undue hardship. Harassment under paragraph 14(1)(c) was not established.

Citation
2012 CHRT 30
Parties
Complainant: Stephen Closs; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Fulton Forwarders Incorporated and Stephen Fulton
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint / Decision (inquiry Concluded)
Outcome
Complaints under paragraph 7(a) and paragraph 7(b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act substantiated; complaint under paragraph 14(1)(c) not substantiated.
Legal Topics
Discrimination, Family Status, Duty to Accommodate, Harassment, Remedies, Lost Wages, Wilful or Reckless Conduct
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Disability Law Administrative Law Discrimination Family Status Duty to Accommodate Harassment +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 4 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Closs

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Fulton Forwarders Incorporated and Stephen Fulton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Canadian Human Rights Act Complaint / Decision (inquiry Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complainant established prima facie discrimination under paragraph 7(a) (refusal to continue employment) on the grounds of disability (knee injury and lupus)
  2. 2 Whether the complainant established prima facie discrimination under paragraph 7(b) (adverse differential treatment) on the ground of family status (miscarriages and requests for leave)
  3. 3 Whether harassment under paragraph 14(1)(c) was established

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal found the complainant established prima facie discrimination under paragraph 7(a) on the grounds of disability (leg injury and lupus) because issuance of the ROE and replacement of duties linked to medical condition, and under paragraph 7(b) on the ground of family status because requests for leave after miscarriages were denied without adequate individualized accommodation; respondent failed to justify actions or show undue hardship. Harassment under paragraph 14(1)(c) was not established.

Court Disposition

Complaints under paragraph 7(a) and paragraph 7(b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act substantiated; complaint under paragraph 14(1)(c) not substantiated.

Orders

  • Order that Fulton Forwarders Incorporated compensate the complainant for lost wages for the period April 12, 2010 to February 10, 2011 (43 weeks and 4 days) with deductions for employment insurance and other earnings as specified in decision; interest on lost wages from April 23, 2010 at Bank of Canada Bank Rate,...
  • Order that Fulton Forwarders Incorporated pay $5,000.00 to the complainant for pain and suffering pursuant to paragraph 53(2)(e) of the Act