Alizadeh-Ebadi v. Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.

Alizadeh-Ebadi v. Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.

The Tribunal found that specific conduct by an employee, David Atwell, comprised harassment and adverse differential treatment on prohibited grounds (race, national/ethnic origin, religion) in respect of Events 1 (derogatory/terrorist remarks), 2 (denial of second computer) and 3 (denial of training). MTS knew or ought to have known of the misconduct and failed to take timely, effective steps; those three Events therefore substantiated discrimination under ss.14(1)(c) and 7(b) of the CHRA. Other alleged Events either lacked sufficient evidence of a link to prohibited grounds or raised disability issues not investigated by the Commission and not properly before the Tribunal; consequently...

Citation
2017 CHRT 36
Parties
Complainant: Kouroush Alizadeh-Ebadi; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Human Rights (employment Discrimination) / Final Decision (inquiry Concluded)
Outcome
Complaint substantiated in part and dismissed in part: Events 1, 2 and 3 substantiated (harassment and adverse differentiation on grounds of race, national or ethnic origin or religion); Events 4-8, 10 and 11 dismissed; Event 9 (disability/accommodation) not properly before the Tribunal and dismissed.
Legal Topics
Harassment, Adverse Differentiation, Accommodation, Workplace Discrimination, Remedies
Source Language
English
Human Rights Employment Law Administrative Law Harassment Adverse Differentiation Accommodation Workplace Discrimination Remedies

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

Parties

Kouroush Alizadeh-Ebadi

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Manitoba Telecom Services Inc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights (employment Discrimination) / Final Decision (inquiry Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Event 9 (failure to accommodate/ disability) and disability grounds were properly before the Tribunal
  2. 2 Whether disability can be considered as a ground for other Events at the argument stage
  3. 3 Whether complainant established prima facie discrimination for the Events before the Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that specific conduct by an employee, David Atwell, comprised harassment and adverse differential treatment on prohibited grounds (race, national/ethnic origin, religion) in respect of Events 1 (derogatory/terrorist remarks), 2 (denial of second computer) and 3 (denial of training). MTS knew or ought to have known of the misconduct and failed to take timely, effective steps; those three Events therefore substantiated discrimination under ss.14(1)(c) and 7(b) of the CHRA. Other alleged Events either lacked sufficient evidence of a link to prohibited grounds or raised disability issues not investigated by the Commission and not properly before the Tribunal; consequently...

Court Disposition

Complaint substantiated in part and dismissed in part: Events 1, 2 and 3 substantiated (harassment and adverse differentiation on grounds of race, national or ethnic origin or religion); Events 4-8, 10 and 11 dismissed; Event 9 (disability/accommodation) not properly before the Tribunal and dismissed.

Orders

  • Pay complainant $20,000.00 for pain and suffering pursuant to section 53(2)(e) of the CHRA, together with interest thereon calculated from January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2015 pursuant to section 53(4) of the CHRA
  • Pay complainant $20,000.00 for special compensation pursuant to section 53(3) of the CHRA, together with interest thereon calculated from January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2015 pursuant to section 53(4) of the CHRA