Admission of Discrimination Not Required for Settlement

July 7, 2016

Under the Nova Scotia Human Rights framework, a Board of Inquiry must approve any settlement reached after a complaint is referred to a hearing before the Board. Recently, in Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission) v Grant, 2016 NSCA 37, a Board of Inquiry refused to approve a settlement. The Board concluded that it could not approve a settlement unless the respondent admitted discrimination. As the respondent had not made such an admission, the Board refused to grant the necessary approval – barring a settlement that the parties were willing to accept.

The Board’s conclusion that an admission of discrimination was a required element of a settlement departed from past practice in Nova Scotia, and the Human Rights Commission appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal held that the Board’s interpretation of the law was wrong and that an admission was not necessary in order for the Board to endorse the settlement. The Court went further, stating that the fact that a settlement has been concluded will in and of itself be seen to be in the public interest because “parties, whatever the forum, are always better off if their disputes can be settled short of formal hearings”. (para 13) The Court stated that insisting on an admission represents a major stumbling block to securing a settlement and that the Human Rights Actallows for settlement without an admission of discrimination.

The requirement that a respondent admit discrimination could have posed a significant barrier to settlements as most respondents would be reticent to admit that they violated the Human Rights Act. The Court of Appeal’s decision should be reassuring to parties in Nova Scotia Human Rights proceedings that a mutually agreed-upon settlement will not be subject to this potentially onerous requirement.

Related Services

Employment & Labour

Related Articles

How to Prepare for Coronavirus in the Workplace

As global concerns are on the rise, and in light of yesterday’s news of the first presumptive case of Coronavirus in Atlantic Canada, employers in this region should consider how to respond if the Coronavirus presents within the workplace. What is Coronavirus? COVID-19, commonly referred to as Coronavirus, is a virus which may cause symptoms […]

read more

Employment & Labour – Top Ten Cases of 2019

2019 brought several notable cases impacting employment and labour law. We have put together a brief summary of 10 Canadian decisions we believe employers should be aware of as we head into 2020. 1. Ruston v Keddco MFG (2011) Ltd, 2019 ONCA 125 Ontario Court of Appeal provides an important lesson that overly aggressive tactics […]

read more
view all
Cox & Palmer publications are intended to provide information of a general nature only and not legal advice. The information presented is current to the date of publication and may be subject to change following the publication date.