Blondin v. Purolator Courier Ltd.

Blondin v. Purolator Courier Ltd.

The Tribunal granted the amendment because it is not plain and obvious that the reprisal allegations could not succeed, the alleged reprisals are directly related to the existing human rights complaint, the events are recent and likely provable, and the case is at an early stage so the Respondent will not suffer unfair prejudice.

Citation
2005 CHRT 7
Parties
Complainant: Luce Blondin; Commission: Canadian Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Purolator Courier Ltd.
Court
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Complaint / Pre Hearing (motion to Amend)
Outcome
Complainant's motion to amend complaint to include an allegation of retaliation under s.14.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act granted
Legal Topics
Retaliation/reprisal, Marital Status Discrimination, Seniority Rights, Dismissal, Amendment of Complaint, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Employment Law Administrative Law Retaliation/reprisal Marital Status Discrimination Seniority Rights Dismissal Amendment of Complaint +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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Luce Blondin

Complainant

Canadian Human Rights Commission

Commission

Purolator Courier Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Complaint / Pre Hearing (motion to Amend)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal should grant the Complainant's motion to amend the complaint to add a reprisal allegation under s.14.1
  2. 2 Whether the proposed reprisal allegations are related to the original complaint and could possibly succeed
  3. 3 Whether allowing the amendment would unfairly prejudice the Respondent given stage of proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal granted the amendment because it is not plain and obvious that the reprisal allegations could not succeed, the alleged reprisals are directly related to the existing human rights complaint, the events are recent and likely provable, and the case is at an early stage so the Respondent will not suffer unfair prejudice.

Court Disposition

Complainant's motion to amend complaint to include an allegation of retaliation under s.14.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act granted

Orders

  • Amendment permitted to add allegation of retaliation pursuant to s.14.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.