Tag: #Hearing

Posted on

Policy Change/Training in Tribunal Decision?

This is very interesting!!

This person won their case in a hearing! Woohoo!

Employee R v. B.H. Allen Building Centre Ltd. dba RONA and others, 2026 BCHRT 105

This part I haven’t seen before in a decision.

*******

[76]           Employee R did not expand on his request with respect to policy changes or training during the hearing or in his closing submissions, and no evidence was presented by either party with respect to this matter. I find there is insufficient information before me to make any specific order in this regard, and I decline to do so.

********

If you are a parent and you want professional development training or policy to come out of your hearing order, if you win, you’d better ask for it! This is something to think about for anyone who wants to take their case to a hearing. You may want to add items like this in your closing submissions, just in case you win.

The fact that this is possible is very interesting!

Always ask, as you navigate the system. You never know what could happen.

For those interested in what the case is all about:

[1]               Employee R is a gay man who sought part-time employment at RONA to supplement his income during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was subjected to a homophobic slur at work by a colleague and filed a complaint with his employer in which he expressed concern about his safety. Subsequently, Employee R’s regular shift was cancelled and then he was terminated.

ORDER

[77]           I have found that the Respondents discriminated against Employee R in his employment based on his sexual orientation, in violation of s. 13 of the Code. Accordingly, I make the following orders:

a.    I declare that the Respondents’ conduct contravened s. 13 of the Code: s. 37(2)(b).

b.    I order the Respondents to cease the contravention and refrain from committing the same or similar contraventions: Code, s. 37(2)(a).

c.     I order the Respondents to jointly pay Employee R the following:

                                                     i.          $877.50 as compensation for wages lost because of the discrimination: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(ii).

                                                   ii.          $10,000 as compensation for injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(iii).

d.    Pre and post judgement interest based on the rates set out in the Court Order Interest Act.

Posted on

BC HRT – You need evidence. Hearsay from your child will not be enough.

The term “hearsay” in this context is when kids come home and tell us things that happened at school that we didn’t witness ourselves.

Here is the heart of the issue. ———- When your child comes home and tells you what happened in school that day—– that in of itself is not evidence the tribunal will automatically accept as fact just on its own. You need evidence. The tribunal will assign little weight to hearsay evidence, compared to staff who can testify firsthand to what they witnessed.

This is going to be a source of frustration. I just want to acknowledge that.

Naturally, the first question is – how do I collect evidence when I am not even there at the school?

Good question.

This is the pickle you are in. You need to gather evidence in other ways. Or consider that your child could testify.

There was a recent BC Human Rights Tribunal decision posted, and it lays out how all of the mother’s allegations were not accepted without evidence. Some of the evidence provided from the school conflicted with her allegations. We have the burden to prove that our allegations meet the discrimination test first. Then, when we complete that, it falls to the school district to justify it, or prove the allegations are not true, with evidence.

Here is the case.

Child D (by Mother D) v. The School District, 2026 BCHRT 106

Each allegation was not accepted by the tribunal because there was no evidence to support the allegation and/or to link the harm to the protected ground – Indigenous Identity. I highly suggest you read the case in full to fully grasp what requirements are needed for the tribunal. Each allegation is clearly listed and explained. I would basically need to cut and paste the whole case here to give you the full context.

I am going to come back to this case later, because if you are a family struggling with family law court issues, there are aspects of this case that highlight the school’s interaction with that. Two parents had different perspectives and take on the child’s education experience. If you are struggling with this – this case will be of interest to you.

Here is another case that went all the way to a hearing and deals with the issue of hearsay from a child.

*******

A and B obo Infant A v. School District C (No. 5), 2018 BCHRT 25 (CanLII)

[42]           I have assigned relatively little weight to the Mother’s evidence where it conflicted with the first-hand accounts given by the School Counsellor, Principal, Vice Principal, and Teachers H, M, and G. I have found the Mother’s hearsay evidence considerably less reliable than the direct evidence of reliable witnesses, where there is a conflict.

[37]           I am entitled to accept some, none or all of a witness’ testimony. Where there was disagreement in the evidence, my findings and reasons are set out. Where necessary to do so, I have assessed credibility and considered factors such as the witness’ demeanour, powers of observation, opportunity for knowledge, judgment, memory, and ability to describe clearly what they saw and heard….(continues)

[228]      In summary, none of these incidents amount to discrimination under the Code. The Mother made numerous allegations about the School District accepting the word of Caucasian students over that of her Child, but agreed in cross-examination, that she did not know the races of the other students involved. Contrary to her testimony, the students involved in the Second October 2015 Incident, April 2016 Incident, and November 2016 Incident were not Caucasian.

********

[44]           During cross-examination, the Mother responded to several questions regarding her testimony about her Child’s version of events by saying that she did not know or was not there. She acknowledged that most of her knowledge of the incidents came through her Child. I find that her son was more likely than not motivated to minimize his involvement in some incidents when reporting them to his Parents, so as to avoid discipline. For example, the Mother described disciplining the Child in relation to an incident where he swore at the Principal. She described their punishment as “Draconian”. (In retrospect, the Mother regretted using that word in her letter). As another example, regarding the November 2016 Incident, the Child only reported to his Parents that he grabbed another student by the collar, whereas I find, as a fact, that the Child choked a student, pushed him over a railing, and spat in his face.

********

Depending on their age and ability, you may want to consider having your child be a witness. Here is a blog about having your child testify. Does my child need to testify?

Here is a case example of a teenager who testified.

******

Student (by Parent) v. School District, 2023 BCHRT 237

[2]               I commend the Student for her participation in this difficult process. She gave evidence that was helpful, straightforward, and credible, and which I have relied on to decide this case. I also thank the Parent and representatives of the District for their hard work and sensitivity in presenting their respective cases.

******

Having your child testify will remove the issue of hearsay or double hearsay.

Also…document, document, document.

Because we are not there witnessing events, the more evidence we can have documented in emails, the better position we will be in to assess our complaint and the evidence we will need to prove our allegations.

Here are blogs on gathering evidence

Documentation
Improper Conduct – Hiding Disclosure – What documents to ask for
Why is Documentation so Important?
Evidence of Harm. Effective advocacy in Education
How to Gather Evidence

Remember, we have to prove the elements of the discrimination test. The burden falls on the person filing the complaint to provide evidence that these things occurred.

Broe v. School Board of Education

[57]           For the reasons that follow, I find that Ms. Broe has not met her burden of proving the elements of her case.

Discrimination Test

Moore v. BC (Education), 2012 SCC 61. To prove discrimination, a complainant has to prove that:

  1. they have a characteristic protected by the Human Rights Code [Code];
  2. they experienced an adverse impact with respect to an area protected by the Code; and
  3. the protected characteristic was a factor in the adverse impact.

*******

I want you to be successful and prepared. The more you understand human rights law and how this get APPLIED and interpreted by the tribunal, the better possion you will be in to assess your case, what to ask for if you are seeking legal advice, and what steps you need to take now to either resolve your issues or make your case through a complaint.

Need help? Here is the list of people/organizations who may be able to help you.

Posted on

“We Deny Each and Every Allegation”

When you file a human rights complaint, and if it gets accepted, you will receive an email notifying you that your complaint is proceeding.

The school will get the email as well. This is the first time they will be contacted by the BC Human Rights Tribunal. They will have an opportunity to submit a “response” a few weeks later.

It will be multiple pages long, and they will be defending themselves. Listing all the reasons that your complaint is not true, or if it is true, their decision-making is justified.

Just a heads up. It is very difficult to read.

If you need to move heavy furniture, read this right before you have to do so, and you’ll be done in a jiffy.

Some of it will be downright ridiculous to you.

At some point early on in the response, you will see the sentence “We deny each and every allegation”.

I read that sentence, and I swear, something snapped and changed in me forever.

I didn’t know this at the time, but this gets sent to every single parent.

I have seen a lot of documents from parents across this country, and this type of sentence is in every single one. Even when they know they are guilty, it doesn’t matter. I would be shocked if this sentence didn’t show up in your response.

Now. I have some thoughts on this.

I am not sure how this sentence started or who thought this would be a good idea to send to people a long time ago, but sending this to an already irate parent is not the most intelligent thing to do. In fact, you are shooting yourself in the foot as far as I am concerned.

I can tell you that after my eyeballs reached the end of this sentence, I had decided that I was taking my case to a hearing. And, I stuck to it. If I ever needed to refill my gas tank, I just re-read this one line. I was refuelled and back in action.

What I read from that sentence was this:

“Dear Kim. You have been cordially invited to attend a hearing. We do hope you will attend. We look forward to the duel.”

And my response was

“Sounds splashing. I shall be there!”

If you want to pick a fight with a mama bear, please do send this to them. I wish you good luck. The blessings will rain down upon you.

For the parents reading this shit, just know, they have to write something. They certainly are not going to send a response that says…. “ummm yup, guilty, we actually did everything they said. We thought we would get away with it…. but gosh… I guess not. Guilty!”

They will take slices of “truth” and state them as they are the most relevant important facts known to humankind. Just because they are writing stuff down doesn’t mean it is true, doesn’t mean they have evidence to back up what they are saying and doesn’t mean their arguments are strong. They could be very legally weak. For example, “XXXXX passed the class.” Meanwhile, we all know it’s because you hired a tutor. You get the idea. Or “XXXXX never asked for ________.” Meanwhile, we know that they never asked for anything because they were terrified.

But that’s what they get paid the big bucks for. (Insert eye roll)

We run on anger.

Thanks for pissing me off. xoxo. That was an excellent strategy. Cheers!

I now read that sentence and crack up. I need it on a t-shirt. It’s incredible how different I feel about these things as I look back in time, years later. Lots of things are shifting as time moves along.

So, if it propels you forward, then awesome. Read it hundreds of times.

If it’s anxiety-producing, every single person gets it. It’s not personal. It’s just one of their standard, boring, meaningless sentences. Them denying things…. heavens to Betsy. Shocking. They just plunk it in.

Posted on

How to Gather Evidence for the BC Human Rights Tribunal

Here are some options to consider. Gathering evidence is VERY important. It will make the school district and their lawyers very uncomfortable. They will not like it, and it could help you get that settlement you are looking for. It communicates to the lawyers that you are preparing for a hearing. They will also be concerned that if you have more evidence, you will feel more confident in your case and may ask for a higher settlement amount. So gathering evidence is EXCELLENT behaviour communication. Because remember, they don’t believe your words, but they do believe your behaviour.

You also want to be collecting evidence when things are going well. You never know what could happen in the future.

Step One – Create your own evidence

  1. Before you even file a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, you are going to be gathering your evidence while you advocate. Emails are KEY.
  2. Examples of this are:
    • After any oral communication (phone call/school meeting/face-to-face conversation) is done, send a follow up email with the meeting notes, summary of the conversation, and key action items or decisions that came from the meeting/conversation. Ask them to reply if you misunderstood anything, or if anything is incorrect.
    • Send emails that document your process. Who you spoke to, who you have emailed, about your advocacy. Documenting a timeline of your process is key.
  3. For some people, situations are so desperate that they are recording school meetings. I have never done this myself but for some people they have gathered the most incredible evidence. In Canada we have one person consent privacy laws. Please do your own research on this. **** IF you are an employee. PLEASE PLEASE consult with an employment lawyer before you do this. Recording your colleagues is VERY different and the case law on this bounces around a lot. You could lose your job over this. So, please consult with a lawyer.
  4. Gather evidence at home. Take pictures of bruises, homework pages, etc. I know this part will feel like an intrusion in your child’s privacy, but you may want to set up your camera to video their meltdowns at home, or them in a conversation with you about school refusal.
    .

Step Two – File a FOI

  1. File a Freedom of Information (FOI) request
  2. Here are the instructions. **** You are going to want to name every single person you have had a conversation with and list their supervisors above them. Also include the superintendent.
    .

With the FOI request, you will most likely never get all the evidence that exists. The school district is certainly not going to just hand you over all the evidence you will need to win your case. They are always wanting to reduce their liability.

But what you may get are some stepping stones that could be very helpful later.

Also check to make sure you think you have everything. If you feel like documents are missing or you want them to remove their redactions, you can file an OIPC complaint.

There was one case where during an OIPC process, the Ministry of Education accidently sent the people everything that they were hiding from them. Order 2833

[4] During the inquiry, the Ministry mistakenly gave the applicant access to a largely unredacted copy of the records (unredacted records) that was intended to be provided only to the OIPC. In doing so, the Ministry mistakenly disclosed to the applicant all the information in dispute under ss. 3(1)(b) and 13(1) and most of the information in dispute under s. 22(1).

Also, the school district I made a request through, accidently sent me emails to their lawyers. I had no idea the lawyers were involved so early on. That was an interesting piece of information. So, hey, why not give it a try, submit an FOI, you never know what you will get.
.

Step Three. – Filing applications for documents through the BC Human Rights Tribunal (BC HRT) process

PART A – Getting TRB documents

  1. When you file a human rights complaint, you may want to consider if you want to file Teacher Regulation Branch (TRB) complaints as well.
  2. This is completely depending on your situation, but you may want to consider not just filing on one person but on multiple people. If you include a principal and file a complaint, it is standard for them to meet with the teacher in trouble with a union rep and there will be meeting minutes. They may submit these to show the TRB they are doing their job and put blame on the teacher. ** But remember, every person you file on you will need to link their behaviour to not being in line with the teachers standards. You can file on teachers, principals and district staff. Anyone who is a certificate holder.
  3. The school staff think that their documents and communication with the TRB are completely confidential. And they are to a point. If you submit an FOI request after the complaint process is finished, you wont get any of the teacher documents. (Hold this point for later)
  4. A strategy that they will do if there are multiple filings, on the group is that they will blame each other and provide evidence on the other people in order to get the heat off of them.
  5. Then, during the human rights complaint process if the mediation settlement meeting fails and you move onto the document disclosure stage, this is where the action happens.
  6. You can file an application for documents. During the document disclosure phase the respondents (school districts lawyers) will give you a bunch of documents. I can tell you right now, it will be crap. They will be selecting documents meant to send you a message. It will be long. Mostly your communications. They will pick out the ones you are going to not like the most. But here, yet again, they aren’t just going to lay out all of the evidence for you. You are going to need to fight for it. And that fight for it, will be via an application process. Form 7.1 – Order a party to give you documents.
  7. You can follow this process and apply for documents from your TRB complaints. For me, this process gave me the most incredible evidence. Like, shockingly so.
  8. You can explain to the tribunal why these documents are relevant to your case, or how you need these documents to question their credibility at the hearing. Be very thoughtful when you write your application.
  9. ****** No matter what, if you request documents and they tell you they don’t have them, DON’T BELIEVE THEM. File an application anyways. This happened to me, I didn’t believe them. Filed an application, and within weeks I got exactly what I knew they had. This was even after an unsuccessful OIPC complaint. The BC HRT has stronger teeth than the OIPC.
  10. Filing applications not only gets you evidence, it makes you expensive. This encourages them even more to settle. Something to keep in mind in a settlement meeting, you may want to let them know all of the applications you plan on filing for the document disclosure part of the process. Which, you can file applications continually up to the hearing. Make this process very expensive for them. The School Protection Program is not going to want to pay for all of these lawyer fees.
    .

PART B – Become a detective

  1. The second step after you get your FOI is go through everything with a fine tooth comb and look at the names on the email addresses. Who is there, but also who is missing. Think if that information is relevant.
  2. Count the pages, are there pages missing. Did they remove anything. (I had missing pages)
  3. Read the emails. Did they mention a meeting or any other documents being created? If so, you are now going to include that in your application for more documents. Follow the trail until you hit a dead end. You are going to want those meeting minutes and a copy of any documents that were created from those meetings.
    .

PART C – What to just automatically request

  1. Request minutes for meetings. If teachers are in trouble, they will be meeting with the principal and a union rep. Request those meeting minutes. There is potential golden evidence in there.
  2. Emails – include teachers, LSS teachers, always a principal, and whoever you last met with – whatever level they are at, request emails that include the name of their supervisor.
  3. Always include the superintendent. ** We want to know if they were involved and aware. They could be a potential witness at your hearing. School district is going to jump when they see their name on the witness list.
    .

Step Four – Another round

  1. Whenever you get documents from your applications, go through everything with a fine tooth comb again. Are there more breadcrumbs that talk about other meetings, involve other people, refer to other documents?
  2. Request that they remove ALL the redactions. This can be done informally, just through an email to the lawyers, and if they don’t – file another application.

.

You are going to need to put your detective hat on and become Nancy Drew. They will most likely be hiding evidence from you, and the tribunal will only be basing their decision on the evidence they have in front of them, not your opinion or thoughts. When people don’t have evidence the tribunal will say something along the lines of your case being dismissed because you haven’t brought your allegations out of the realm of conjecture. Gathering your evidence will be KEY. Be patient. Be methodical. Start the hunt.

Also, remember to document when things are going well.

As this parent reports,

“Districts often argue that they did the best they could with the information they had at the time. Keeping thorough documentation when things are going well makes it’ll a lot more difficult to use this argument, since you will be able to clearly show when specific accommodations were removed and the harm that resulted. I think it also adds to my credibility as a parent, showing that I collaborate in good faith and facilitate accommodations.” – Parent

Related Blogs
Let’s Talk about Hindsight
Why is Documentation so Important?
Evidence of Harm. Effective advocacy in Education
Liability in Education

Posted on

Orders To Attend

Hot tip!

Something to consider as you approach a hearing. You want to make sure everyone is going to be able to attend, and hasn’t booked a vacation or a surgery, etc. You want to make sure they are available!

You can submit a request for “Orders to Attend”

Go to the website on the BC Human Rights Tribunal website to their FORMS section.

Scroll down and find the section on Orders to Attend a Hearing

Fill out the form for each person on your witness list. You can do this 5-6 months before the hearing.

THEY DO NOT LIKE THIS!

You have every right to go up to each person and serve this to them yourself. The school district will want to do it instead. Up to you if you want to allow that. They will need to confirm to you in writing when it has been done. (Whether they do it, or are holding off, who knows….)

But I can tell you, if you want to send them into a panic, this is one of those chess moves that will get their attention.

If they fight you on providing any of the individual information you are requesting, EMAIL YOUR CASE MANAGER ASAP.

Posted on

Building Advantage – Hearing Preparation

This post is going to be for the parent/caregivers who want to take their case to a hearing. If this is where you are going to find your peace, I want to help to get you there. This post is for you.

There is a concept that lawyers are taught – try and get every little advantage you can. Even if it is ever so small. Something as simple as even requesting a page extension for your submission. When dealing with the school district’s lawyers, don’t let anything slide. The belief is that many small advantages will build over time and it will benefit you eventually. It could be just what tips you over the line and you win. Every little thing, all of the details, they all will build your case. Don’t ever think…oh I’ll just let it go. It’s not a big deal. When preparing for a hearing, everything is a big deal. Fight to keep all the witnesses you want. Enter in all the documents you want. Take ALLL the time you need. They will fight you on things. Don’t give in.

There was a time when I could have let things slide, but I didn’t. I filled a specific type of application, which I didn’t “win”. However, the tribunal member obviously saw merit in what I was submitting. Not only in their response did they tip their hat to the work I had done so far, they gave me a gift I never asked for, wasn’t expecting, and something they didn’t have to do. They were levelling the playing field between a self-represented parent and the lawyers. They saw the injustice in what I was reporting. It was because I didn’t let anything slide that I got this gift, which were two legal tests for my hearing. If I proved either one of these legal tests, I won my case. It gave me a target.

So on the fifth day of the hearing, I believe I won one of the legal tests. We’ll call it legal test on the left. I could tell the exact moment the tribunal member and the respondent lawyer realized I met one of the legal tests. They couldn’t control their body language. They just reacted. It wasn’t subtle either. I can recall that moment like it is a clip from a movie.

However, in the end the tribunal member went with legal test on the right. The legal test on the left would have helped a very very small group of students, only for those in unique situations. The legal test on the right, would impact everyone. I believe she was trying to make the most impact with the evidence she had before her. So, the tribunal member went with legal test on the right. I have absolutely peace about that. All I wanted from this decision was a specific “duty” and I got that and more. I also think she was protecting me from a Judicial Review, with a more solid legal analysis. Regardless, the story ends well.

If I let certain things slide from the lawyers, and I didn’t submit that application, I never would have gotten those two legal tests, which were a guiding light to me.

Don’t. Let. Anything. Slide.

Every little funky-monkey move they (lawyers/school staff) make, or incorrect information written in an email, don’t let it slide. Because years later if they made a statement that your kid is doing fine, and you didn’t respond to that, they may use that as evidence that you agreed your kid was doing fine.

There is an exception to the don’t let anything slide rule…. if you think they are just poking at you to get a reaction, absolutely let those things slide. Depends on how obvious it is or what they are doing, you may be able to do something with all of that later. You may want to file an improper conduct complaint with the tribunal or file a complaint against them with the Law Society. Depending on how desperate they are, sometimes they may do things that are serious infractions. Lawyers have a Code of Conduct they must follow. Good to be aware. They aren’t allowed to play dirty.

If they think you are truly intending to bring your case to a hearing, you may notice that they will lay out little bread crumbs hoping you will pick it up, so they can engage with you. Weird stuff will start happening or things that are uncharacteristic of the district/school. They want to pull you in closer to them. If you want that hearing, I suggest you don’t pick them up.

The schools and lawyers will always underestimate you. In the beginning I have to admit, I was offended. I was insulted how little they thought of me. Then I realized, it helped me out a lot. If you want that hearing…let them underestimate you. They will be assuming that you will be settling a couple of weeks before a hearing. Let them think that. Stay under the radar. Then pop out hearing ready at the end. You may catch them a lot less prepared.

For the day to day advocacy, we don’t want to seem adversarial with our child’s school so we let the little things go. They know this. We are afraid of being picky. Or being annoying. Or being too much. They count on us feeling this way, and they take advantage of that.

They aren’t letting anything slide. They take every possible advantage they can. We can’t let anything slide either. Otherwise we risk losing a hearing we shouldn’t have, a weak settlement offer and/or possibly a successful dismissal application.

While navigating the BC Human Rights Tribunal speak up when you notice things aren’t fair, and ask lots of questions. Push the line. Ask for what you need. On the school level, speak up when they make statements about your child that you don’t agree with.

Just do it In writing. Of course.

ALL of the details matters. They all add up.

Posted on

Keeping Your Child’s Information Private

There is a way to keep your child’s information private as you go through the BC Human Rights Tribunal process (BC HRT). If you want to request that something specific happen you can email your case manager and they may tell you that you need to submit an application or they may be able to just respond to your request in the email. If you do send a request you must cc: the school districts in your email. Not every application that you submit will have a public decision, but it’s possible that a decision regarding your process/request could be posted on their website. These applications are things like amending your complaint, joining complaints if you file a family status complaint connected to yourself, fast-tracking, etc.

You can apply for your case to be anonymized. The the BC HRT will anonymize a minors human rights complaint automatically anyways as it is part of their rules, but it is always good to communicate your wishes.

Page 3 of their RULES book

Complaints about minors

(7) In an application to limit public disclosure of information that would identify a minor, the
tribunal will presume that the minor’s privacy interests outweigh the public interest in access
to the tribunal’s proceedings.

Or if you specifically don’t want the district to be anonymized, it’s good to put this in the application and explain why it is in the public interest for them to be identified. (See below for case example) HINT: The school districts REALLY don’t like to be named. You can use it to you advantage to put pressure on a settlement.

The BC HRT doesn’t really advertise this, but if you don’t want to settle and you want a hearing, you can also apply for a “CLOSED” hearing so that no one from the public attends.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I am going to write a blog on this specific topic, but I just want to drop some info. If the school districts lawyers are trying to scare you by saying they are going to force your child to testify and be a witness at the hearing – NICE TRY. Just because they may want them on the witness list, doesn’t mean they are going to get it. The BC HRT makes all of their decisions in the best interest of the child. But the respondents LOVE to dangle this threat as a way to send your protective parent instincts into overdrive. But, more on this later.

How you do either of these options (anonymization and closed hearing) is by filing out an application.

Go to the FORMS page on the BC HRT website.

You will be filling out a 7.1 GENERAL APPLICATION.

You will be asking to anonymize your child’s name. You don’t need to anonymize the districts name, but they will most likely fight for their name to be anonymized too. Their argument is often that it may expose the identity of the child. You can argue back. There are cases where the identity of the child is anonymized and the district is not. Or if that is not something you wish for, you can agree to anonymize the district as well.

Read everything on the form. There is a process that you have to go through before you submit it. You need to contact the school district lawyers and ask them if they agree. They will have to provide you with “their position” on your application. When you email them, I suggest you give them a deadline. Ask them to respond to you within 5 business days.

This is the same form you can ask for a closed hearing. Just tick off OTHER and write “closed hearing” on the PURPOSE OF APPLICATION page. They give you space to answer their questions, but you can always just write “see attached” and then type up your answers. You can submit up to 10 pages.

REMEMBER: They are always going to analyze you through a cost-risk lens. If you become too expensive, they are going to be more encouraged to settle with you. It costs them big money to respond to applications. So if your mediation meeting fails, become expensive.

Here is a list of some decisions around anonymization.

The Student (by the parent) v. The School District, 2025 BCHRT 17

[8]               Rule 5(7) presumes that a minor’s privacy interests outweigh the public interest in accessing the Tribunal’s proceedings. As such, it is appropriate to limit publication of information that could identify the Student in connection with this complaint.

Mother A obo Child B v. School District C, 2015 BCHRT 64

[21]           Rule 5(7) establishes a presumption respecting minors for good reason. Children are vulnerable, in some cases fragile, and those with disabilities even more so. It is difficult enough growing up in the face of existing peer pressure without having the additional burden of adult-driven issues being superimposed in a public way in their formative years. Moreover, these issues may not be readily understood by other children and used as a tool of ridicule and hurt. While some public exposure is inevitable, broad public exposure through unrestricted publication is neither necessary nor in the child’s best interests. At this stage of the proceedings, I find that the privacy interests of Child B outweigh the interests of the public and Child B’s identity and that of Mother A shall be anonymized.

[27]           I note that Mother A alleges that the complaint and future outcome are specific to the policies and practices of this particular district. Further, she says that understanding which district is involved may be important for the public, or future complainants in School District C or other districts. I find that school districts are large public institutions that touch a broad spectrum of the public. The reasons advanced by Mother A for identifying School District C reflect a legitimacy and the sentiment found in para. 11 of the School District 61 case cited above. In the circumstances as they currently stand, I find that there is nothing that outweighs the public’s interest in knowing the identity of School District C and the open court principle.

[28]           Therefore, I am prepared to grant School District C the requested anonymization for the purposes of only this decision. Unless a further order of the Tribunal is obtained, School District C shall be identified in all subsequent proceedings. If the Respondent School District C finds unique circumstances that weigh in favour of its anonymization, it may reapply for such an order.

Child K (by Ehmke) and another v. Queen of All Saints School and another, 2024 BCHRT 150

In this case the mother and child wanted to be named. The school did not want to be named. Child was anonymized until she is an adult and then can apply to have her name added. School lost their application and the decision was to name them.

(29) I appreciate that naming the School could make it easier for motivated and diligent people to identify the people who were involved in the events of this complaint. In that respect, my order will not perfectly protect the people involved. However, I find that – unlike the individual educators and staff involved – there is a specific public interest in the identity of the School as a publicly funded institution serving the public: A obo B v. School District 61, 2014 BCHRT 105 at para. 11. I am not persuaded that this public interest is outweighed by the potential that some of the educators may then be identified. There have already been a number of complaints and proceedings involving the educators and staff, and Mrs. Ehmke points out that many people within the community already know about the complaint.

(30) I deny the application to limit publication of the name of the School.

To search up more decisions, here are instructions on how to use CanLii.