Newsletters

56

Can you be both a neutral investigator and a biased employer?

Violence, harassment and personal conflicts at work are delicate situations where the employer may be overwhelmed by the problem, and thus be hard-pressed to solve it.

If you are an employer facing such circumstances, chances are that you will be in a dilemma: you know that you need to act as a neutral investigator, yet feel the need to protect your interests. This is especially true in harassment cases, where it is difficult to perform a neutral and objective investigation while you’re also suspected of having failed to provide a harassment-free working environment.

In such cases, Part XX, “Violence Prevention in the Work Place” of the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations could inspire you. Section 20.9 compels an employer to appoint a competent and impartial person to investigate the violence, real or alleged. Although these regulations apply only to employers bound by federal labour and employment legislation, their inherent logic is equally sound under provincial jurisdictions. When a problem occurs, any employer should, as soon as possible, call upon a qualified person with relevant experience to shed light on the situation.

You will thereby be presented with neutral and objective conclusions and recommendations to help you understand the situation and justify the measures to take and sanctions to impose.

Commentary by Jacques Bélanger, from our Labour and Employment Law Group.

56

Articles in the same category

Finally Properly Interpreted, the Policy Had a Heart

In a recent decision, Morissette v. BMO Société d’assurance vie, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to the interpretation of insurance policies. Facts In June 2003, the Plaintiff took out a health insurance policy (hereinafter “Policy”) with BMO Société d’assurance vie (hereinafter “BMO”). The Policy provides, among other things, that $150,000 will be paid […]

When the Remedy Becomes the Dispute: Medical Liability Under Scrutiny

In the case N.L. v. Mathieu, 2025 QCCS 517, the Superior Court dismissed a medical liability lawsuit filed by a teacher against her former family doctor, in which she sought over $1.9 million in damages. The plaintiff accused her doctor of having inappropriately prescribed medication over several years, without proper follow-up and without informing her […]

Bill 89 and the Future of Labour Disputes in Quebec

Passed by the National Assembly on May 29, 2025, Bill 89 (An Act to give greater consideration to the needs of the population in the event of a strike or a lock-out, hereinafter the “Bill”) will come into force on November 30, 2025. The Bill, which has faced strong opposition from unions, will bring significant […]

Latent Defects: Notice Must Be Given, but to Whom, When and How? The Court of Appeal Answers

On this past September 26, in the context of a claim for latent defects, in the matter of Meyer v. Pichette (Estate of Morin), 2025 QCCA 1193, the Court of appeal confirmed a Superior Court judgment which dismissed proceedings in warranty brought against former vendors as sufficient notice of the defects was not provided prior […]

You Should Not Believe Everything you Read on Social Media…

In a recent decision, Boucal v. Rancourt-Maltais, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to defamation cases. Facts The Defendant is a member of a private Facebook group called “Féministes Bas-St-Laurent”. In this group, Ms. Khadidiatou Yewwi allegedly posted testimony about the Plaintiff. Stating that she was troubled by the testimony and had herself heard […]

The Window of Conflict and Police Officers

In the case of Souccar v. Pathmasiri, rendered on June 11, the Quebec Superior Court was called upon to decide on a civil liability claim regarding an allegedly abusive arrest and detention. The dispute arose from a condominium disagreement concerning the installation of windows. Police Intervention In July 2016, window installers hired by the condominium […]