Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre

Interim remedies at the HRTO revisited following termination

October 22, 2018 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Employee Relations, HR Policies and Procedures, Human Resources, Human Rights

The previous article citing Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre discussed interim orders at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. Of note is the rarity of a decision that institutes compliance on the part of the respondent prior to the conclusion of the matter. In such a request, the burden of proof is placed squarely upon the applicant, as in Codrin v. Commissionaires Great Lakes.

Codrin v. Commissionaires Great Lakes, Disability, employment law, human rights, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decison, interim decisons, interim remedies, Kevin Sambrano, reinstatement, reprisal, Rule 23.2, termination, Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre, Toronto human rights paralegal, Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure

Ainmelk v. Jeoffrey: Interim remedies at the HRTO revisited

July 20, 2018 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Human Resources, Human Rights

Although the Tribunal does have the power to issue orders in regard to compliance, it is rare that they are granted, based on a very specific criteria that must be met. One should review each guideline carefully before requesting such an order in the interest of time, money, and adding to the complexity of the matter.

Ainmelk v. Jeoffrey, employment law, harassment discrimination, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decisions, interim remedies, Kevin Sambrano, Rule 23.2, the Code, Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre, Toronto human rights paralegal

HRTO issues rare interim order based on family status

December 19, 2017 Kevin Sambrano, Sambrano Legal Services Human Resources, Human Rights

As common as an interim order or decision may be, it is uncommon that the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario may issue an order that institutes compliance on the part of the respondent prior to the conclusion of the matter. Such was the case Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre.

accommodation to undue hardship, Canada (Attorney General) v Johnstone, childcare obligation, discrimination, duty to accommodate, employment law, family accommodation, family status, Family Status Accommodation, hrto, human rights code, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, interim decisions, interim orders, Johnstone test, Johnstone v Canada, Kevin Sambrano, maternity leaves, obligation under the Code, Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, Sambrano Legal Services, Tomlinson v. Runnymede Healthcare Centre