The Yukon Human Rights Commission and March v. Yukon Human Rights Board of Adjudication and Yukon Government case was appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Yukon Territory (“the Court”).
Ultimately, the Court agreed with the Supreme Court of Yukon decision (“the Supreme Court”). The Complainant had argued that the Board was incorrect and asked the Court to revisit the evidence. This is not the function of a court of appeal. The Court only has the power to revisit questions of law – in other words, issues pertaining the interpretation of law. This was question of fact, which are questions that must be answered by referencing facts and evidence and inferences arising from those facts. Questions of fact can only be revisited by where there is a major error. In this case, the Court did not believe that such an error was made.
The complaint was dismissed because the Complainant was unable to prove that there was discrimination. The Respondents temporarily removed the Complainant from the workplace to address and investigate unacceptable behaviour that they were not required to tolerate. It was not a stereotypical reaction to his mental disability. They asked for a medical assessment as part of the investigation, but that was delayed in part because the Complainant considered his conduct to be appropriate. The investigation ultimately revealed no basis for disciplinary action.
The Complainant was given a fair and exhaustive hearing with the Board. There was no error in the Board’s decision to dismiss the case. Therefore, the Court dismissed the appeal.