2,734
edits
Difference between revisions of "BC Human Rights Code (6:III)"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
BC Human Rights Code (6:III) (view source)
Revision as of 21:23, 5 September 2023
, 21:23, 5 September 2023→8. Retaliation
| Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
The test for retaliation is set out in [https://canlii.ca/t/hqtpj Gichuru v Pallai, 2018] BCCA 78 at paras 50–58. To prove retaliation, a complaint must show: | The test for retaliation is set out in [https://canlii.ca/t/hqtpj Gichuru v Pallai, 2018] BCCA 78 at paras 50–58. To prove retaliation, a complaint must show: | ||
a | a) The respondent was aware that the complainant had made a complaint; | ||
b | b) The respondent engaged in or threatened to engage in conduct described in s. 43; and | ||
c | c) There is a sufficient connection between the impugned conduct and the previous complaint. This connection may be established by proving that the respondent intended to retaliate, or may be inferred where the respondent can reasonably have been perceived to have engaged in that conduct in retaliation, with the element of reasonable perception being assessed from the point of view of a reasonable complainant, apprised of the facts, at the time of the impugned conduct. | ||
In Sales Associate v. Aurora BioMed, the Tribunal interpreted the meaning of the protection for someone who “might” make a complaint. The Tribunal concluded that the protection applies where the retaliator is aware that a person might pursue some legal recourse for discrimination. It is not necessary to prove that the retaliator was specifically aware of the possibility of a human rights complaint at the Human Rights Tribunal (see paras. 151-163). | In Sales Associate v. Aurora BioMed, the Tribunal interpreted the meaning of the protection for someone who “might” make a complaint. The Tribunal concluded that the protection applies where the retaliator is aware that a person might pursue some legal recourse for discrimination. It is not necessary to prove that the retaliator was specifically aware of the possibility of a human rights complaint at the Human Rights Tribunal (see paras. 151-163). | ||
