About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

28 Queen's L.J. 637 (2002-2003)
Common Law Actions for Sexual Harassment: The Jurisdiction Question Revisited

handle is hein.journals/queen28 and id is 647 raw text is: Common Law Actions for Sexual Harassment: The Jurisdiction Question Revisited Gillian Demeyere* Although human rights legislation in most Canadian jurisdictions includes the right of an employee to be free from harassment on the basis of sex, victims of sexual harassment are increasingly pursuing remedies in tort or contract. Canadian courts most often use the pleadings approach to determine the issue of jurisdiction: where a plaintiff pleads an independent cause of action (such as assault or wrongful dismissal), the claim falls within the courts' jurisdiction, and where a plaintiff pleads sexual harassment, the claim falls under human rights legislation. This article describes bow the pleadings approach attempts to strike a balance between the absence of an exclusive jurisdiction provision in human rights legislation and the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Bhadauria v. Seneca College, which seems to oust the jurisdiction of courts over claims that fall under the legislation. The author argues that the pleadings approach takes an overly narrow view of the jurisdiction of courts, by assuming that a sexual harassment claim must be based solely on human rights legislation and not also on rights known to the common law. She suggests that the proper test to be applied on a motion to dismiss should not be whether the plaintiffhas pleaded an existing cause of action, but whether the claim discloses a reasonable cause of action. The author argues that the provisions and public policy of human rights legislation do not exhaust the entitlements to which a victim of sexual harassment may lay claim, including the protection of rights and interests falling within the jurisdiction of the common law. Fortunately, the willingness of Canadian courts to bear sexual harassment cases framed as independent causes of action may pave the way for the common law to eventually recognize sexual harassment itself as an independent actionable wrong. Introduction I. The Jurisdiction Question A. Interpreting the Legislation B. Considering Bhadauria C. The Pleadings Approach * S.J.D. Candidate, University of Toronto. Thanks to Denise R~aume, Melanie Randall, Dennis Klimchuk and an anonymous reviewer for their helpful suggestions. G. Demeyere

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most