Human Rights

Canadian employers, service-providers and educators are subject to a complex body of human rights laws and policies. It is essential that organizations seek the counsel of specialized human rights experts to ensure they are informed of their rights and responsibilities and act in accordance with them.

WeirFoulds advises and represents public and private sector clients on a wide range of human rights matters. We assist organizations with employment-related issues, such as negotiating pay equity plans, accommodating employee disability and family status claims, and promoting inclusive workplaces. We advise public sector organizations on compliance with human rights and employment equity legislation, and on the proper provision of health, educational and other public services. We also represent clients in mediations and before human rights commissions and tribunals. Our partner Raj Anand is the former Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Related Practice Areas
Meet our lawyers and professionals in this area
Areas of Expertise
  • Accommodation
  • Charter rights and freedoms
  • Compliance
  • Disability claims
  • Discrimination
  • Employment equity
  • Human resources
  • Human rights codes
  • Investigations
  • Litigation
  • Mediation
  • Pay equity
  • Tribunal proceedings
  • Workplace policies
Representative Experience
  • In Donevan v. University of Windsor, 2013 HRTO 1882, Mr. Anand was appointed pursuant to an HRTO settlement to conduct a review of the University’s policies relating to classroom accommodations for students with disabilities. His review was in part the subject of this decision.
  • In Carasco v. University of Windsor, Mr. Anand was lead counsel in a claim by a law school professor that she was denied the position of Dean because of gender and race discrimination.
  • In Trozzi v. College of Nurses of Ontario, the Divisional Court granted the College’s application for judicial review from a decision of the HRTO in a case involving disability accommodations for a graduate nurse who was seeking admission to the College.
  • Pidgeon v. College of Nurses of Ontario, 2012 HRTO 1712 was a case in which a nursing registrant argued that the revocation of her registration was discriminatory on grounds of disability.
  • Ryan v. College of Nurses of Ontario, 2014 HRTO 139 was a case in which a graduate nurse argued that the College’s refusal to register her was discriminatory on grounds of disability.
  • Hatibovic-Kofman v. Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, 2010 HRTO 1578 was a case in which the argument was made that the College’s denial of specialty certification was the result of systemic discrimination against foreign trained dentists.
Latest Human Rights News & Insight